Venezuelan Prez Election 2012 - opinion and what have you

[Clinton Huxley]

There is an element of hypocrisy in the UK's position however. The majority of the Hong Kong population had no wish to be part of China in 1997. They weren't given a choice. The situations are not dissimilar.

This meant for the Falklands thread, Rum?

You are right, of course. This is where the realpolitik comes in. We could and (hopefully) still can defend the Falklands. A defence of Hong Kong would have been impossible. You can only play with the cards you have.

[Rum]

There is an element of hypocrisy in the UK's position however. The majority of the Hong Kong population had no wish to be part of China in 1997. They weren't given a choice. The situations are not dissimilar.

This meant for the Falklands thread, Rum?

You are right, of course. This is where the realpolitik comes in. We could and (hopefully) still can defend the Falklands. A defence of Hong Kong would have been impossible. You can only play with the cards you have.

OOps! Getting my South American Threads mixed up! (posted the comment there as well now)

[sandinista]

So, to summarise, Chavez is a thug but we should support him over other candidates because the US is naughty?

Ok, absolutely!

no, not even close.

[Clinton Huxley]

So, to summarise, Chavez is a thug but we should support him over other candidates because the US is naughty?

Ok, absolutely!

no, not even close.

I reckon I am close. Your response to a critique of Chavez was that the US administration does bad things. A completely irrelevant point. Chavez is a thug regardless of what the US position on anything is.

[MrJonno]

Any evidence that most Hong Kong people wanted to stay British, didnt find any evidence of any polling only comments I can see is a lot of people wanted to be independent.
Not wanting to being occupied by a foreign (as in distant) country tends to dominate over any idealism like freedom, capitalism/communism etc (Iraq and Afghanistan are good examples of this)

[JimC]

There is an element of hypocrisy in the UK's position however. The majority of the Hong Kong population had no wish to be part of China in 1997. They weren't given a choice. The situations are not dissimilar.

They did, however, know that the inevitable hand-over was going to happen...

[Tyrannical]

So, to summarise, Chavez is a thug but we should support him over other candidates because the US is naughty?

Ok, absolutely!

no, not even close.

I reckon I am close. Your response to a critique of Chavez was that the US administration does bad things. A completely irrelevant point. Chavez is a thug regardless of what the US position on anything is.

With a name like Sandinista, what would you expect?

[Coito ergo sum]

so, you choose links from a Columbian newspaper and a few anti chavez Venezuelan newspapers, as for the video, who knows where that is from. Some random video on a gore site. Good work, did you even read those links?

Sure did. Apparently, you didn't. Let me guess, because zcommunications doesn't report it, it doesn't happen, right? But, o.k., you want more:

More torture during the Chavez reign: http://totalitarianimages.blogspot.com/ ... zuela.html
Threats to human rights activist (from the known right-wing source, Amnesty International...) http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ ... 04/2012/en
Freedom of expression under attack in Venezuela: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ ... 09/2011/en
Death threats to human rights activist: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ ... 06/2011/en
Concerns raised include violations of the rights of human rights defenders; use of the judicial system to persecute those critical of the government; interference with judicial independence; violence against women; freedom of expression and assembly; police violations of human rights; and prison conditions. http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ ... 07/2011/en
Father and daughter beaten by police: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ ... 05/2011/en
Judge arrested and held for a year for rendering a decision the Chavez government didn't like: http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-upda ... 2011-01-26
Venezuelan government deliberately targeting opponents: http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-upda ... 2010-04-01
Critics of Venezuelan government detained: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ ... 04/2010/en
Venezuela not respecting fundamental human rights: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ ... 03/2010/en

There were continuing reports of human rights violations by the police, including unlawful killings and torture. Most of these abuses were not properly investigated and little, if any, judicial action was taken.

http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/venezuela/report-2012

Must be all made up to smear the just and honorable Hugo, right?

I mean, for crying out loud -- Venezuela, and other Latin American countries, torture the fuck out of people, and have been doing it for a long, long time, as a matter of course. To compare that to a few waterboardings is really laughable.

On that note, it is correct to point out that torture in Latin America has been horrendous, interesting side note is that many of the torturers throughout Latin America were trained in theier methods by americans at the school of the americas. What is laughable is to state that the only torture the US has done is waterboarding.

http://soaw.org/

Make your case. The link doesn't.

Nonsense. The US does no purposefully bomb civilians.

You have proof of this?

You have proof that they do? Yours is the affirmative claim.

However, yes, I do. US federal law. Official US policy is to avoid and minimize civilian casualties, and US military operations do that to an unprecedented degree nowadays.

Here is how around half the population of Venezuela lives:

precisely the situation Chavez has been trying to fix. To think this can be done in a few decades is ridiculous, precisely why I am hoping he gets re-elected.

You have proof of this?

You made the claim that the US treats its poor like shit. That laughable claim is patently untrue. If this is being "treated like shit" then what do you call the way Venezuela treats its people? Much worse than shit, right?

Yeah - he's a thug. He rigs elections, squelches freedom of the press, and seizes private property, on top of everything else I listed. He's tin pot wannabe dictator that oppresses his people. You make the silly argument that poor people are better off in Venezuela than in the US? Joke and half, that.

Every president the US has had had been a thug. Elections are rigged in the US worse than anywhere. squelches freedom of the press? What a load of shit that is. Seizes private property...good. I never once said that poor people are better off in Venezuela than in the US. Grab that out of your ass as well I see.

So what? Even if we assume your ridiculous assertion to be true arguendo, how does that make Chavez "not" a thug?

Well, if poor people aren't better off in Venezuela than in the US then I guess they are treated worse than shit. You're the one who said the "poor" in the US are treated like shit. Since even the poor in the US live better than most of the rest of the world, I guess getting treated like shit isn't that bad, relatively speaking. I'd much rather be treated like the poor are treated here than the poor are treated anywhere in South America.

All this talk about national healthcare and such. You know what healthcare is like for "the poor" in Venezuela? They prefer not to go to the State provided hospitals, because the care sucks. Like every other South American country, if you want good care, you pay out of pocket. The "free" healthcare in Venezuela and other countries, like Brazil, etc., is a model of "you get what you pay for." But, of course, you say that in the US, the poor are treated like shit. Let's hear your examples of places where they aren't treated like shit. Cuba? Russia? Venezuela? Iran? Where? Where the poor not treated like shit?

[Coito ergo sum]

So, to summarise, Chavez is a thug but we should support him over other candidates because the US is naughty?

Ok, absolutely!

no, not even close.

So how does the US treatment of the poor relate to Chavez' thuggery or lack thereof?

[Strontium Dog]

Must be all made up to smear the just and honorable Hugo, right?

Amnesty is written off by Chavez supporters as a shill for the US government.

[Coito ergo sum]

Must be all made up to smear the just and honorable Hugo, right?

Amnesty is written off by Chavez supporters as a shill for the US government.

Any source critical of Chavez must be a shill for the US government, because Chavez is a selfless, altruistic, benevolent leader who only wants to help the poor, and nothing more. Since that is true, all criticisms of him must be false. It stands to reason.

[Ian]

I question whether sandi is even an atheist, because he clearly never learned how to reason properly. Nevermind for now the extreme level of bias; what's really pathetic is how he throws out outrageous assertions and then expects others to disprove them. Sandi, the things you mention are hardly obvious to others - the onus is on you to prove them, not for others to disprove them.

[sandinista]

Sure did. Apparently, you didn't. Let me guess, because zcommunications doesn't report it, it doesn't happen, right? But, o.k., you want more:

...and blah blah with more "reports" from amnesty now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_ ... ernational

Am I saying Chavez is the perfect glowing supernatural leader and protector of all that is right and good? No. Am I saying he is better than anything seen in Latin America for centuries, yes. Do I agree with everything he does? No. Do I agree with everything anybody does (especially governments)? No. Not sure why this is so hard to understand. Also not sure it is so hard to understand biased news reporting on a leader opposed to the prevailing global ideology.

Must be all made up to smear the just and honorable Hugo, right?

If you think there are not smear campaigns and propaganda against Chavez you are kidding yourself.

However, yes, I do. US federal law. Official US policy is to avoid and minimize civilian casualties, and US military operations do that to an unprecedented degree nowadays.

Oh "official policy" is your proof Out of all the ridiculous claims you've made this is, at least, the funniest.

Well, if poor people aren't better off in Venezuela than in the US then I guess they are treated worse than shit. You're the one who said the "poor" in the US are treated like shit.

You know nothing at all about history or economics do you? To compare the two countries as equal is ludicrous to the highest degree. I would like to say I expect more from you, but I don't.

Where the poor not treated like shit?

No where, now, that's a liberal democratic policy. Which is why I am hoping Chavez is relected so he can continue what has been started.

Any source critical of Chavez must be a shill for the US government, because Chavez is a selfless, altruistic, benevolent leader who only wants to help the poor, and nothing more. Since that is true, all criticisms of him must be false. It stands to reason.

Again, not true. Of course there is propaganda and smear campaigns against Chavez, that's not to say he's perfect, just stating a fact.

I question whether sandi is even an atheist, because he clearly never learned how to reason properly.

Nice try Ian. I don't think you nor coito are atheists since you both seem to be ready and willing to believe dogma, and have no critical thinking skills whatsoever.

Nevermind for now the extreme level of bias

Extreme level of bias? That's what this thread is full of. What are you on?

what's really pathetic is how he throws out outrageous assertions and then expects others to disprove them.

No, what's really pathetic is you thinking any assertion I have made is outrageous.

Sandi, the things you mention are hardly obvious to others

Speak for yourself.

[Coito ergo sum]

Sure did. Apparently, you didn't. Let me guess, because zcommunications doesn't report it, it doesn't happen, right? But, o.k., you want more:

...and blah blah with more "reports" from amnesty now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_ ... ernational

Am I saying Chavez is the perfect glowing supernatural leader and protector of all that is right and good? No. Am I saying he is better than anything seen in Latin America for centuries, yes. Do I agree with everything he does? No. Do I agree with everything anybody does (especially governments)? No. Not sure why this is so hard to understand. Also not sure it is so hard to understand biased news reporting on a leader opposed to the prevailing global ideology.

What don't you like about him? What does he do that you don't agree with?

I didn't say you said he was the glowing supernatural leader and protector of all that is right and good. I addressed what you did say, not what you didn't say.

Must be all made up to smear the just and honorable Hugo, right?

If you think there are not smear campaigns and propaganda against Chavez you are kidding yourself.

There may well be smear campaigns by his opponents. Just because there are smear campaigns doesn't mean he's not a scumbag.

And, you forget about the fact that Chavez has his own smear campaigns against his opponents, and part of those campaigns is intimidation and jailing of political opponents and protesters. That's consistent with Marxist socialist ideology, though -- the bit about dissenters being enemies of the State, once the state has set down its plan.

However, yes, I do. US federal law. Official US policy is to avoid and minimize civilian casualties, and US military operations do that to an unprecedented degree nowadays.

Oh "official policy" is your proof Out of all the ridiculous claims you've made this is, at least, the funniest.

You asked for evidence, I gave you some. It's also US (and Brit, etc.) practice to take steps to warn civilians ahead of entering certain areas and/or beginning bombing, to give them a chance to get out. It's also US (and others) practice to use the most directed and limited measures whenever possible, and to avoid killing civilians. That can be seen in the distinction between US, Brit and other western operations, and operations by, say, the Russians.

The evidence of the US purposefully murdering civilians you've presented equals: 0.

Well, if poor people aren't better off in Venezuela than in the US then I guess they are treated worse than shit. You're the one who said the "poor" in the US are treated like shit.

You know nothing at all about history or economics do you? To compare the two countries as equal is ludicrous to the highest degree. I would like to say I expect more from you, but I don't.

Make your case, dummy. You love to throw out bullshit allegations, and then never back them up with anything other than "oh, come on, don't you know ....?" That's your M.O.

The reality is that the poor aren't treated like shit in the US, and that is evidenced by the fact that poverty in the US is NOTHING compared to the rest of the world. You want to make some bullshit argument that the US must be held to a higher standard because we're the US? That's just plain stupid. Venezuelan poor are, really truly, treated like shit, because they live in utter squalor by the millions - to the tune of 50+% of the population. Compared to "the poor" in the US -- they don't even live in human conditions. That's the fact.

But, no -- you say the US is different, right? Why? What is it that the US would have to do with its poor in order for you to not be "treating them like shit?" Free college? If not that, what?

Where the poor not treated like shit?

No where, now, that's a liberal democratic policy. Which is why I am hoping Chavez is relected so he can continue what has been started.

What is it that you think he started?

Any source critical of Chavez must be a shill for the US government, because Chavez is a selfless, altruistic, benevolent leader who only wants to help the poor, and nothing more. Since that is true, all criticisms of him must be false. It stands to reason.

Again, not true. Of course there is propaganda and smear campaigns against Chavez, that's not to say he's perfect, just stating a fact.

So, what negatives do you acknowledge about Chavez?

I question whether sandi is even an atheist, because he clearly never learned how to reason properly.

Nice try Ian. I don't think you nor coito are atheists since you both seem to be ready and willing to believe dogma, and have no critical thinking skills whatsoever.

Sandi critical thinking skills: "I support anyone who says they're a Socialist." All else is a smear campaign.

Nevermind for now the extreme level of bias

Extreme level of bias? That's what this thread is full of. What are you on?

what's really pathetic is how he throws out outrageous assertions and then expects others to disprove them.

No, what's really pathetic is you thinking any assertion I have made is outrageous.

Sandi, the things you mention are hardly obvious to others

Speak for yourself.

Name one person on this thread who has agreed with you.

[Ian]

Sandi, prove how elections in the US are rigged worse than anywhere else in the world. Then we'll move onto the other stuff.

Reasoning 101: you make a ludicrous assertion, you're the one who has to prove it. If you think what you say should be accepted as common sense to intelligent people, I've got bad news for you: it's not. Either you're hopelessly biased and out of touch with reality, or else you really are smarter than all us ignorant sheeple. I don't suppose it's occurred to you that it is, in fact, the former.