Right. I'd say it's a combination of that and his quest for more political power. Which is ironic, if you think about it.
No, you see, it's not genocide when we do it.
The choice between Chavez and a U.S. installed puppet is like the choice between a gulag and a concentration camp. Lucky them.
Man you just confused the hell out of me. I'm going to have to think about that statement for the next hour or two.
Of course not. Chavez is not a fascist, terrorist or a dictator because he opposes the U.S. government's foreign adventurism. Rather, he is a fascist dictator because he... is.
So? He wouldn't be the first fascist dictator to be elected.
Politicians, at least.
What're your grounds for calling him a fascist dictator?
Generally fascist dictators don't have to undergo actual elections that'd dispose them, which is what's probably going to happen to Chavez in the next election. So they're not "Saddam Elections". I don't see any grounds for calling him a fascist or a dictator in any form of either word.
Neither do your comments of comparing Chavez to a gulag and a U.S.-installed puppet to a concentration camp seem to have any real grounds at all. Regardless I'm quite sure the people would rather elect their "gulag" instead of getting one imposed on them.
just because Chavez is a dictator and a crackpot does not make him wrong about everything.
Everyone's saying that! DICTATOR?! Listen, people, just because there's someone who's against your country or says things that you disagree with, it doesn't make them "fascists" or "terrorists" or "dictators".
Chavez is an elected official. Hell, there's a very good chance that he'll lose the coming election and then all these naive Americans won't have to rant about him. Supposedly his popularity has been decreasing as the next election approaches.
It's so amazing that people would call like, Chavez and Allende "Communists" and "Dictators" and then totally ignore all the actual dictators that we support and overthrow democracies to raise to power.
I don't know what Chavez is trying to accomplish other than saber-rattling, seeing as this guy is simply not a threat. He called the president "the devil" (a rather Islamic move on his part), called the UN antidemocratic (keep in mind that he's tightening his grip on his country's constitution and curtailing human rights), and feels that his country has no power in the international body. After his speech, he said, "I have a meeting with the Axis of Evil over here, so I have to go." (That made me chuckle a little, actually.) Is he a threat? No, but the guy he's in bed with, Ahmadinejad, is. Hitler II, meet Peron II. I guess hypocrisy runs in the blood of wannabe dictators. Chavez's goal is pretty admirable- lead the way of nonalignment with the U.S.- but at the same time it's pretty scary that he's allying with some shady characters like Iran and Belarus.
And reading this post just makes me chuckle. People just reacting to everything with their gut without knowing any of the reasons or information of the region.
Or perhaps, maybe, any consideration for why he ****ing despises the American government?
No, he's "Hitler II"! and a "Hypocritical"! The naivety therein, accusing a victim of American coups and madness, is so ignorant and misguided that it's nearly comical. You made me chuckle a little, actually.
"I'm pro America, but I totally think this guy nailed it on the head when he said America is an imperialist, supremacist devil."
Yeah, don't quote me unless you actually quote me.
What he said was that the American government has a history of imperialism and supremacy, which is true. As I stated before, they have a long history of hypocrisy when it comes to terrorism, and a long history of backing unsavory characters just because they're enemies of enemies.
But, I'm American, I was born in America, I plan to stay here until I die, and I want the best things for America. That's what it means when I'm pro American. However, that doesn't mean I don't see the truth in his statements, I just cynically recognize them. Since this country is my homeland, I love it, but I'm not naive enough to believe we don't have a history of imperialism or global domination, or that we don't have blood on our hands. It's in our best interests, usually.
As for it being irresponsible to call a world leader a "devil", well, perhaps. But if that world leader's government was sponsoring coups to kidnap or kill you, a legitimately elected official, then I'd probably respond with the same rhetoric. Imagine if the President of Syria was actively funding attempts to overthrow or kill the President of the U.S.
I'm pretty sure George W. Bush wouldn't take it any more or less "irresponsible" in his rhetoric.
I will acknowledge that the United States government did not want Allende in power, mainly due to the companies with private property in Chile (which could have been socialized, which the U.S. government feared), but also with his ties to the KGB. Although the CIA was told by Nixon to "put pressure" on him, there doesn't seem to be any evidence that would seem to point that the disgruntled Colonel Roberto Souper's coup was directly assisted by the CIA (although Colin Powell did believe so). It seems to me that if there was a document displaying this sort of information, it would have been declassified during the Clinton Administration.
That being said, the U.S. acted in a way that was irresponsible during the Cold War.
Also, to both Americans and Europeans, we need to keep in mind that foreign policy changes greatly with each president. When you are listening to what these people are saying, ask yourself if they were talking in the same caustic manner when Clinton was president.
Furthermore, you forget the matters of Mossadegh, Orlando Letelier, Luis Posada Carriles, and far more "extremists" throughout the world and history silenced by America.
Not all of them were lucky enough to just be overthrown and exiled, as in the case of Letelier, who was simply murdered.
And in some cases, as in the case of Carriles, we gave a brutal murderer and terrorist asylum because he had killed innocent Cubans, who were obviously Communists. No need to count the fact that the entire Cuban teenage fencing team had been destroyed on the plane bombing. They were just "Communists". So, we gave him asylum and decided that the evidence against him wasn't substantial enough. We still childishly refuse Venezuela's extradition requests, probably just because of our "poor relations" with the current government.
As for Allende, if you're turning your eyes to obvious American hands in the coup, you're really being naive.
From what I've read, many documents regarding the Allende matter and Project FUBELT are still quite classified. Perhaps we'll never know the truth for a while, though we do certainly know it was extremely likely. To deny the extreme likelihood that we have Allende's blood on our hands is ignorance, frankly.
As for Soviet ties, the Soviets mainly just used the poor soon-to-be-victim-of-American-sponsored-coup. Eventually they loosened ties with him after judging him to be not very useful. He refused to use, unlike other "evil" Communists, military force to quash opposition. Instead his defenders out on the streets before those American-funded militaries were simply students and the people themselves.
Maybe it sounds like I'm glorifying him too far, but I believe he deserves it.
One can argue about Che, his faults, his pros, misconceptions, but one cannot argue the simple facts of Allende. In that he was an elected leader targeted by Nixon and the CIA for overthrowal simply because he disagreed with them and had socialist ideals.
Quote from Allende"s Last Words over free radio as tanks surrounded his presidential building »
Workers of my country, I have faith in Chile and its destiny. Other men will overcome this dark and bitter moment when treason seeks to prevail. Keep in mind that, much sooner than later, great avenues will again be opened, through which will pass the free man, to construct a better society.
Long live Chile! Long live the people! Long live the workers!
These are my last words, and I am certain that my sacrifice will not be in vain, I am certain that, at the very least, it will be a moral lesson that will punish felony, cowardice, and treason.
Quote from Henry Kissinger on the matter »
I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves.
That last Kissinger quote is just the sort of pompousity and global domination that Chavez is accusing the United States of still harboring.
The point is that as you said, the U.S. didn't exactly act responsibly during the Cold War and it's not exactly paranoid or unjustifiable for a South American leader who's suffered a few American-sponsored coups in a region infamous for America-backed tyrants to say things like he said.
Besides, chances are he'll lose the coming Venezuelan election.
(I believe it's this year or next year?)
That way we won't need to be more cynical and hypocritical by funding more fascists and murderers to overthrow another democratically elected president. Maybe the next person they elect will agree to be our pawn.
Boy, golly, I sure hope so.
Because he is young (youthful presidents are a much more popular thing than an old grumbling man, a la the "Camelot" White House of Kennedy), black (historic, gives him a percieved outlook onto issues that old white men generally don't), is a great public speaker (again, it's basically been since Reagan for a great speaking president, maybe as far back as Kennedy for a Democrat), and holds the right balance of sturdy Democratic views that make him tough to paint as a Cindy Sheehan crazy-type.
Again one of the widest misperceptions out there. It is NOT that everyone hates her, it's that she is polarizing so you either like her OR despise her, leaving very little "undecided" or "independant" ground to pick up along the election trail.
Well yes, I realize both those perceptions, she is quite polarizing, I was just saying that the hate for her is just often ridiculous. She is extremely polarizing.
And yeah, he's a young black male who speaks well, so I suppose everyone's jumping on the Obama trend. Either way, it's way too early to even consider an Obama presidential run. I'm thinking 2012.
Personally I would like to see Barack Obama as president at the end of 2008.
Can I ask you why?
No, seriously. It seems a trend among people to support Obama, though the majority know absolutely nothing about him other than the fact that he's male and black. He's barely entered the political scene to be fleshed out politically, I doubt most of his supporters really support him because of particular areas he stands on that they agree with. It just sort of seems trendy.
With that said, Obama running in 08 would be political suicide, I think. He'll run, eventually, but he needs more experience, more recognition. I'm talking 2016, maybe 2012.
As for Hillary Clinton, I would support her, but it would be suicide.
Because everyone seems to really dislike her.
I can never really understand why (Just like I can never really understand why people love Obama).
They just seem to hate her with every cell of their body, the people that do. They call her a "*****", and there's been massive Republican anti-Clinton propoganda if you ask me.
Maybe it's because she's a woman in a position of strength?
All I know is that America isn't ready for a female president, just yet. We've gotten closer, but we're not there yet. Yet.
Personally, I'd like Al Gore.
John Kerry will never ever run and it'd be stupid to consider him a possibility. But I feel that Al Gore could win.
I can see Richardson, Biden and Clark as possibilities, as for the Republicans, McCain or Giuliani.
I think if McCain runs he'll have a strong chance, especially now that he's become a Bush lapdog so as not to lose Republican votes (despite the horrific and horrible campaigning that Rove and the Bush Campaign did against him back in 2000, and their differences in opinion).
Another unexplainable (After people loving Obama and people hating Clinton).
Democrats and their love affair with McCain.
Listen kids, McCain is not your friend. Stop having fantasies about a Democratic President and a McCain Vice President. McCain is not your friend. He may be a moderate, but to get the votes he'll need, well, as we've seen, he'll suck up to anyone, including Falwell and the Christian right.
Which is why I found this so funny and depressing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZ3LhPCKAoU
Maybe because the U.S. has a history of sponsoring CIA terrorism to overthrow democratically elected governments in South America and imposing U.S.-supporting leaders, fascists, dictators, whatever as long as they're U.S.-leaning?
Can you blame him for calling the head of the government that sponsored an illegal coup against his government a "devil"?
Sure, Chavez sometimes goes too far. Sure, he has some unsavory bedmates (Such as Iran). But can you blame him? That's all he can go to in this sort of situation. What choice does he have but to go to some of those nations for friendship or assistance or a relationship when the U.S. is plotting things like launching military coups to overthrow him (a democratically elected leader). They've done it before all over South America.
RIP Salvador Allende. RIP.
These points just hit head on:
Quote from Chavez »
President Michelle Bachelet reminded us just a moment ago of the horrendous assassination of the former foreign minister, Orlando Letelier.
And I would just add one thing: Those who perpetrated this crime are free. And that other event where an American citizen also died were American themselves. They were CIA killers, terrorists.
And we must recall in this room that in just a few days there will be another anniversary. Thirty years will have passed from this other horrendous terrorist attack on the Cuban plane, where 73 innocents died, a Cubana de Aviacion airliner.
And where is the biggest terrorist of this continent who took the responsibility for blowing up the plane? He spent a few years in jail in Venezuela. Thanks to CIA and then government officials, he was allowed to escape, and he lives here in this country, protected by the government.
And he was convicted. He has confessed to his crime. But the U.S. government has double standards. It protects terrorism when it wants to.
And this is to say that Venezuela is fully committed to combating terrorism and violence. And we are one of the people who are fighting for peace.
Luis Posada Carriles is the name of that terrorist who is protected here. And other tremendously corrupt people who escaped from Venezuela are also living here under protection: a group that bombed various embassies, that assassinated people during the coup. They kidnapped me and they were going to kill me, but I think God reached down and our people came out into the streets and the army was too, and so I'm here today.
But these people who led that coup are here today in this country protected by the American government. And I accuse the American government of protecting terrorists and of having a completely cynical discourse.
Like I said before:
Who can really blame him or fault him for making comments like that about a government that sponsored terrorists to kidnap and kill him and overthrow a democratically elected government?
This statement just hit it head on:
Quote from Chavez »
But the U.S. government has double standards. It protects terrorism when it wants to.
Now don't take it wrong, I support the United States, I'm an American. I just recognize we're certainly not free of blood and terrorism on our hands, and cynically I'm fine with it.
what I don't understand is the whole speel about the United States being an evil, imperialist empire. Seems a bit exaggerated to me. I think a lot of people have a tendency to blame everything bad on the U.S.
Yeah, it's totally not like we've supported cruel dictators, overthrown democratically elected leaders and supported/sponsored cruel genocide and war.
Chavez, no matter his faults and rhetoric, had it spot on when he said:
Quote from Chavez »
Wherever he looks, he sees extremists. And you, my brother -- he looks at your color, and he says, oh, there's an extremist. Evo Morales, the worthy president of Bolivia, looks like an extremist to him.
The imperialists see extremists everywhere. It's not that we are extremists.
Don't be surprised if Chavez gets overthrown by a shady military coup in a few years sponsored by the CIA and Venezuela gets cursed with their own Pinochet, simply because of American greed and imperialism.
Says the "girl" with the text "the beauty of a goddess" in purple over a naked woman in "her" sig. Do you run outside naked yelling "STOP PAYING ATTENTION TO ME" and waving your arms on a regular basis?
Hate on Tneill aside, KCW has a hilarious point right there.
Too true.
The people that Cynical is rightfully calling out are showing up on the thread agreeing with him with no sense of irony whatsoever.
There was the sound of hollow clapping in the arena as Solidus Snake came in, staring disdainfully at Uriel and Dabura.
Solidus Snake smiled menacingly, his tentacles writhing behind him.
He turned and eyed Dabura with his good eye, his right eye, the other being covered with a black eyepatch.
"Well, well, well. Looks like nothing but a bunch of weaklings. The bird lieutenant and his even weaker little angel opponent. I'll make short work of you, don't worry, your genes must be quite inferior, you look like a mongrel, you have no right to pass them on."
With that, Solidus drew his katana from a sheath implanted on the right side of his armor and smiled.
I've already started a massive recruiting drive by myself, since we can't expect to just have MTGers in our country.
And I've also got many supporters backing me and my group the Itopian Red Brigade, although it doesn't exist yet other than in ideal since the constitution and government haven't even been formed as of yet.
I sorta suck. lol
What're your grounds for calling him a fascist dictator?
Generally fascist dictators don't have to undergo actual elections that'd dispose them, which is what's probably going to happen to Chavez in the next election. So they're not "Saddam Elections". I don't see any grounds for calling him a fascist or a dictator in any form of either word.
Neither do your comments of comparing Chavez to a gulag and a U.S.-installed puppet to a concentration camp seem to have any real grounds at all. Regardless I'm quite sure the people would rather elect their "gulag" instead of getting one imposed on them.
No, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I don't mean to flame anyone, I'm just going crazy.
Everyone's saying that! DICTATOR?! Listen, people, just because there's someone who's against your country or says things that you disagree with, it doesn't make them "fascists" or "terrorists" or "dictators".
Chavez is an elected official. Hell, there's a very good chance that he'll lose the coming election and then all these naive Americans won't have to rant about him. Supposedly his popularity has been decreasing as the next election approaches.
It's so amazing that people would call like, Chavez and Allende "Communists" and "Dictators" and then totally ignore all the actual dictators that we support and overthrow democracies to raise to power.
And reading this post just makes me chuckle. People just reacting to everything with their gut without knowing any of the reasons or information of the region.
Or perhaps, maybe, any consideration for why he ****ing despises the American government?
No, he's "Hitler II"! and a "Hypocritical"! The naivety therein, accusing a victim of American coups and madness, is so ignorant and misguided that it's nearly comical. You made me chuckle a little, actually.
Yeah, don't quote me unless you actually quote me.
What he said was that the American government has a history of imperialism and supremacy, which is true. As I stated before, they have a long history of hypocrisy when it comes to terrorism, and a long history of backing unsavory characters just because they're enemies of enemies.
But, I'm American, I was born in America, I plan to stay here until I die, and I want the best things for America. That's what it means when I'm pro American. However, that doesn't mean I don't see the truth in his statements, I just cynically recognize them. Since this country is my homeland, I love it, but I'm not naive enough to believe we don't have a history of imperialism or global domination, or that we don't have blood on our hands. It's in our best interests, usually.
As for it being irresponsible to call a world leader a "devil", well, perhaps. But if that world leader's government was sponsoring coups to kidnap or kill you, a legitimately elected official, then I'd probably respond with the same rhetoric. Imagine if the President of Syria was actively funding attempts to overthrow or kill the President of the U.S.
I'm pretty sure George W. Bush wouldn't take it any more or less "irresponsible" in his rhetoric.
Furthermore, you forget the matters of Mossadegh, Orlando Letelier, Luis Posada Carriles, and far more "extremists" throughout the world and history silenced by America.
Not all of them were lucky enough to just be overthrown and exiled, as in the case of Letelier, who was simply murdered.
And in some cases, as in the case of Carriles, we gave a brutal murderer and terrorist asylum because he had killed innocent Cubans, who were obviously Communists. No need to count the fact that the entire Cuban teenage fencing team had been destroyed on the plane bombing. They were just "Communists". So, we gave him asylum and decided that the evidence against him wasn't substantial enough. We still childishly refuse Venezuela's extradition requests, probably just because of our "poor relations" with the current government.
As for Allende, if you're turning your eyes to obvious American hands in the coup, you're really being naive.
From what I've read, many documents regarding the Allende matter and Project FUBELT are still quite classified. Perhaps we'll never know the truth for a while, though we do certainly know it was extremely likely. To deny the extreme likelihood that we have Allende's blood on our hands is ignorance, frankly.
As for Soviet ties, the Soviets mainly just used the poor soon-to-be-victim-of-American-sponsored-coup. Eventually they loosened ties with him after judging him to be not very useful. He refused to use, unlike other "evil" Communists, military force to quash opposition. Instead his defenders out on the streets before those American-funded militaries were simply students and the people themselves.
Maybe it sounds like I'm glorifying him too far, but I believe he deserves it.
One can argue about Che, his faults, his pros, misconceptions, but one cannot argue the simple facts of Allende. In that he was an elected leader targeted by Nixon and the CIA for overthrowal simply because he disagreed with them and had socialist ideals.
That last Kissinger quote is just the sort of pompousity and global domination that Chavez is accusing the United States of still harboring.
The point is that as you said, the U.S. didn't exactly act responsibly during the Cold War and it's not exactly paranoid or unjustifiable for a South American leader who's suffered a few American-sponsored coups in a region infamous for America-backed tyrants to say things like he said.
Well, let's cross our fingers for that.
I just fear the possible popularity of a McCain or Giuliani.
(I believe it's this year or next year?)
That way we won't need to be more cynical and hypocritical by funding more fascists and murderers to overthrow another democratically elected president. Maybe the next person they elect will agree to be our pawn.
Boy, golly, I sure hope so.
Well yes, I realize both those perceptions, she is quite polarizing, I was just saying that the hate for her is just often ridiculous. She is extremely polarizing.
And yeah, he's a young black male who speaks well, so I suppose everyone's jumping on the Obama trend. Either way, it's way too early to even consider an Obama presidential run. I'm thinking 2012.
Can I ask you why?
No, seriously. It seems a trend among people to support Obama, though the majority know absolutely nothing about him other than the fact that he's male and black. He's barely entered the political scene to be fleshed out politically, I doubt most of his supporters really support him because of particular areas he stands on that they agree with. It just sort of seems trendy.
With that said, Obama running in 08 would be political suicide, I think. He'll run, eventually, but he needs more experience, more recognition. I'm talking 2016, maybe 2012.
As for Hillary Clinton, I would support her, but it would be suicide.
Because everyone seems to really dislike her.
I can never really understand why (Just like I can never really understand why people love Obama).
They just seem to hate her with every cell of their body, the people that do. They call her a "*****", and there's been massive Republican anti-Clinton propoganda if you ask me.
Maybe it's because she's a woman in a position of strength?
All I know is that America isn't ready for a female president, just yet. We've gotten closer, but we're not there yet. Yet.
Personally, I'd like Al Gore.
John Kerry will never ever run and it'd be stupid to consider him a possibility. But I feel that Al Gore could win.
I can see Richardson, Biden and Clark as possibilities, as for the Republicans, McCain or Giuliani.
I think if McCain runs he'll have a strong chance, especially now that he's become a Bush lapdog so as not to lose Republican votes (despite the horrific and horrible campaigning that Rove and the Bush Campaign did against him back in 2000, and their differences in opinion).
Another unexplainable (After people loving Obama and people hating Clinton).
Democrats and their love affair with McCain.
Listen kids, McCain is not your friend. Stop having fantasies about a Democratic President and a McCain Vice President. McCain is not your friend. He may be a moderate, but to get the votes he'll need, well, as we've seen, he'll suck up to anyone, including Falwell and the Christian right.
Which is why I found this so funny and depressing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZ3LhPCKAoU
Can you blame him for calling the head of the government that sponsored an illegal coup against his government a "devil"?
Sure, Chavez sometimes goes too far. Sure, he has some unsavory bedmates (Such as Iran). But can you blame him? That's all he can go to in this sort of situation. What choice does he have but to go to some of those nations for friendship or assistance or a relationship when the U.S. is plotting things like launching military coups to overthrow him (a democratically elected leader). They've done it before all over South America.
RIP Salvador Allende. RIP.
These points just hit head on:
Like I said before:
Who can really blame him or fault him for making comments like that about a government that sponsored terrorists to kidnap and kill him and overthrow a democratically elected government?
This statement just hit it head on:
Now don't take it wrong, I support the United States, I'm an American. I just recognize we're certainly not free of blood and terrorism on our hands, and cynically I'm fine with it.
Yeah, it's totally not like we've supported cruel dictators, overthrown democratically elected leaders and supported/sponsored cruel genocide and war.
Chavez, no matter his faults and rhetoric, had it spot on when he said:
Don't be surprised if Chavez gets overthrown by a shady military coup in a few years sponsored by the CIA and Venezuela gets cursed with their own Pinochet, simply because of American greed and imperialism.
Hate on Tneill aside, KCW has a hilarious point right there.
Too true.
The people that Cynical is rightfully calling out are showing up on the thread agreeing with him with no sense of irony whatsoever.
Name:
Solidus
Age:
28
Height:
6'10
Weight:
200 lbs
Appearance:
A tall pale man with trim icy blonde hair.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Solidus.jpg (Without armor and stuff)
Background:
A former cop turned bounty hunter, Solidus now takes whatever jobs that're offered to him, his speciality is killing.
Crew:
Skills:
Agile, well-trained in combat, pretty good aim.
Armor:
Weapons:
A katana
Vehicle:
Normal black motorcycle
Crooklyn Dollars:
500 CD.
Miscellaneous Equipment/Jewelry/Non-weapon items:
An eyepatch for his injured left eye, usually wears it.
Rep:
100 Rep.
There was the sound of hollow clapping in the arena as Solidus Snake came in, staring disdainfully at Uriel and Dabura.
Solidus Snake smiled menacingly, his tentacles writhing behind him.
He turned and eyed Dabura with his good eye, his right eye, the other being covered with a black eyepatch.
"Well, well, well. Looks like nothing but a bunch of weaklings. The bird lieutenant and his even weaker little angel opponent. I'll make short work of you, don't worry, your genes must be quite inferior, you look like a mongrel, you have no right to pass them on."
With that, Solidus drew his katana from a sheath implanted on the right side of his armor and smiled.
Well, I joined...
Simply because it looked amusing and interesting.
I've already started a massive recruiting drive by myself, since we can't expect to just have MTGers in our country.
And I've also got many supporters backing me and my group the Itopian Red Brigade, although it doesn't exist yet other than in ideal since the constitution and government haven't even been formed as of yet.