Another American backed coup happening in Venezuela

Spannerplank

Gatling wrote: »

Links or any other proof at all

CNN conducted an interview with two supposed military officers on January 28th, 29th

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/29/americas/venezuela-army-defectors-plea-for-arms/index.html

So if you are any kind of military expert you would see straight away that these two clowns are either patsies or actors.

Check out their ensignia.

Spannerplank

Thargor wrote: »

Do you think if you just keep asking enough stupid questions people will give up and you'll be able to have the thread to yourself or something?

No I dont.
I'm asking a question. What does a populist mean?
You put it out there so I would like to know what you mean.

Spannerplank

Thargor wrote: »

You want me to do your homework for you? Are you going to start repeatedly denying theres inflation or empty supermarket shelves now until someone makes an ass out of you again like with the flamingo story?

no.Tell me what causes food shortages and inflation. You don't need to do anybody's homework. Why is there inflation and food shortages in Venezuela?

Gatling

Spannerplank wrote: »

So if you are any kind of military expert you would see straight away that these two clowns are either patsies or actors.

Check out their ensignia.

I take it that's all your evidence to back up your claims


Captain and 2nd lieutenant insignia


Uniforms are correct for Venezuela

Jimmy Garlic

two wheels good wrote: »

... Elliott Abrams is an unrepentant war criminal. He played a central role in the mass-slaughter of tens of thousands of people across Central and Latin America in the dirty wars of the 1980s. He was a player in the Iran-Contra scandal. "

A major player, the guy should have been taken to The Hague. All this talk about Maduro being a tyrant and hardly a single mention about the sanctions placed on Venezuela by the US. Same old story, sanction a country until there isn't even basic medicines available then point at whoever the leader is and blame them.

Gatling

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

A major player, the guy should have been taken to The Hague. All this talk about Maduro being a tyrant and hardly a single mention about the sanctions placed on Venezuela by the US. Same old story, sanction a country until there isn't even basic medicines available then point at whoever the leader is and blame them.

Targeted sanctions not blanket sanctions against a whole country ,
Never mind a country thats nearly 900 billion in debt .

All Americas fault - not the basket case leaders who have been clueless about running a democratic state ,but while everyone else gets poorer and more hungry the leaders look fat and seem to get quite rich .

AngryHippie

Spannerplank wrote: »

So if you are any kind of military expert

:rolleyes:



Plenty of them hereabouts.

Good loser

Spannerplank wrote: »

Thank you.

Ok, the Herald article looks pretty convincing so I'll accept that people have been killing and eating wild animals for food. I still harbour serious doubts about rats.

But, and it's a very big but, what is the level of starvation? So far there have been no reports of deaths by starvation. So how bad is the problem?

I'm not denying that their is a crisis in Venezuela but the food shortages are not maduros doing. Sanctions and oligarchs who control certain segments of the food industry have strangled supplies in order to cripple the economy, foment unrest and grease the skids for a hostile coup that will facilitate the privatisation of Venezuela 's oil into American hands.

But it's also a play to prevent Venezuela from trading oil in any currency other than the petrodollar. The same thing was done to Iraq and Libya and attempts to do it to Iran have been in the offing since 2002.

Maintain dollar dominance over oil supplies is the ultimate goal and Venezuelans or a few flamingos be damned.

What insufferable priggishness!


Post after post you looked for proof of flamingo/rat eating and when you get the flamingo 'proof' you resort to the rats. Amazing you didn't look for a video of the birds actually being eaten? Did it occur at all to you that they might be slaughtering the flamingos to feed their pet rats?


If you got a free one way ticket to Venezuela would you take it? Or a two way?

Jimmy Garlic

Gatling wrote: »

Targeted sanctions not blanket sanctions against a whole country ,
Never mind a country thats nearly 900 billion in debt

The sanctions have affected the whole country as a matter of fact. Ireland is 240 billion in debt with less than one fifth of the population of Venezuela...what's your point? Should Donald Trump sanction Ireland and threaten invasion??

VinLieger

I love how the irish socialists seem to know better than the venezuelans who live here, maybe ask them what they think of maduro and his regime?

seamus

Nothing says, "I'm not an election-rigging dictator" quite like blockading shipments of international aid into your own country.

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2019/0207/1028024-venezuela/

Yes, I'm aware that it's a bit of a game, part of the reason these shipments are sent is to provoke Maduro. But realistically any democratically-elected leader would allow this aid through to show that they're legit and willing to work through the problem.

A blanket refusal to engage with anyone when your legitimacy is questioned, is dictatorship 101.

Larbre34

You're either on the side of fellas who bypass constitutions, rule by decree, starve and impoverish citizens, murder protesters and political opponents, strip assets and employ distraction and propaganda in an arsenal of dictatorship, or you're not.

This has sweet F.A. to do with Irish military neutrality /non-alignment. Carry on Mr Coveney, you're doing it in my name anyway.

johnnyskeleton

Mod note:

Threads merged as they are effectively discussing the same thing i.e. International backing of Juan Guaidó over Nicolás Maduro

markodaly

Brian? wrote: »

I’m pretty sure the US placed financial sanctions on Venezuala under Obama. They can’t access debt markets or sell gold or other minerals to the US or any company that operates in the US. The one thing they can sell is oil, which the US is a sponge for.

The US is now a net exporter of Oil.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-06/u-s-becomes-a-net-oil-exporter-for-the-first-time-in-75-years

This issue being about oil is a strawman.

markodaly

touts wrote: »

Lenin
Stalin
Mao
Castro x2
Kim X3
Ceausescu
Chavez

All socialists. All Dictators. All people you should be very "wary" of living under I don't believe Ireland should be neutral in the fight against socialism.

Agree. I would argue that Socialism as in not the Social Democracy kind but the real Socialism kind (Marxism/Trotskyism) can only be achieved through totalitarianism. Socialism like that cannot be voluntary it has to be mandated across society and the state to work, hence why then people flee it as in the cases of Berlin, Cuba and now Venezuela.

It has got me thinking though. Is there a comparable on the right, where an economic system of government has made people flee and it gets so bad that the state locks its own citizens into its borders?

breatheme

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

It has threatened to invade if it doesn't get its way.

But it hasn't yet.

I support recognition of Guaidó's presidency as interim president and the holding of elections.

Which is what Ireland is doing.

Gatling

breatheme wrote: »

But it hasn't yet.

Anti US hyperbole America is going to invade , America is starving Venezuela , America , America,

Never mind the basket case leaders they have and had that's left the country in this state

breatheme

I am a leftie through and through, but even then: Venezuela is a mess and has been for more than two decades. Maduro has consistently incarcerated or outright murdered opposing journalists and politicians. If the country will ever move forward, he needs to step down.

I'm not the biggest fan of Trump. But come on, Finland has recognised Guaidó as well. As INTERIM president.

James Brown

breatheme wrote: »

But it hasn't yet.

I support recognition of Guaidó's presidency as interim president and the holding of elections.

Which is what Ireland is doing.

He said it's an option, I know it's Trump, but world leaders don't use such language without it being a big deal.

Gatling wrote: »

Anti US hyperbole America is going to invade , America is starving Venezuela , America , America,

Never mind the basket case leaders they have and had that's left the country in this state

But the thread is regarding the US moves towards Venezuela. Not the place to be trying to play down their real or perceived intent toward Venezuela.

breatheme wrote: »

I am a leftie through and through, but even then: Venezuela is a mess and has been for more than two decades. Maduro has consistently incarcerated or outright murdered opposing journalists and politicians. If the country will ever move forward, he needs to step down.

I'm not the biggest fan of Trump. But come on, Finland has recognised Guaidó as well. As INTERIM president.

And the US's role? Trying to help the little guy? Only in it for the people? Trump admires dictators elsewhere. The US creates, supports and arms them.

breatheme

Matt Barrett wrote: »

He said it's an option, I know it's Trump, but world leaders don't use such language without it being a big deal.



But the thread is regarding the US moves towards Venezuela. Not the place to be trying to play down their real or perceived intent toward Venezuela.



And the US's role? Trying to help the little guy? Only in it for the people? Trump admires dictators elsewhere. The US creates, supports and arms them.

A stopped clock is right twice a day. They haven't invaded yet, and I don't think Congress will let them.

Jimmy Garlic

Matt Barrett wrote: »

He said it's an option, I know it's Trump, but world leaders don't use such language without it being a big deal.



But the thread is regarding the US moves towards Venezuela. Not the place to be trying to play down their real or perceived intent toward Venezuela.



And the US's role? Trying to help the little guy? Only in it for the people? Trump admires dictators elsewhere. The US creates, supports and arms them.

It supports at least one monarchy straight out of the dark ages, the house of Saud. The US has made it clear time and time again that it doesn't care one iota about people, just business and what it can loot, doesn't matter who dies or how many....and you are dead right it never had a problem with dictators, Pol Pot is just one example of a dictator they supported, Saddam Hussein was their golden boy for ages, there are almost countless examples.

James Brown

breatheme wrote: »

A stopped clock is right twice a day. They haven't invaded yet, and I don't think Congress will let them.

But he did put it out there as a threat, which was the point.

Manic Moran

Spannerplank wrote: »

CNN conducted an interview with two supposed military officers on January 28th, 29th

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/29/americas/venezuela-army-defectors-plea-for-arms/index.html

So if you are any kind of military expert you would see straight away that these two clowns are either patsies or actors.

Check out their ensignia.

What’s wrong with their insignia? Looks like standard Venezuelan army rank insignia to me.

breatheme

Matt Barrett wrote: »

But he did put it out there as a threat, which was the point.

And Congress won't approve it I hope. But Guaidó needs to be recognised.

James Brown

breatheme wrote: »

And Congress won't approve it I hope. But Guaidó needs to be recognised.

They need fair elections not the US war mongers for profit installing a possible stooge.

breatheme

Matt Barrett wrote: »

They need fair elections

Agreed.

not the US war mongers for profit installing a possible stooge.

He's not going to be the president, he's going to be the INTERIM president as the CONSTITUTION states.

Jimmy Garlic

breatheme wrote: »

And Congress won't approve it I hope. But Guaidó needs to be recognised.

Why so? People had barely heard of him before he declared himself to be president. Jerry Buttimer declaring himself president here would be the equivalent, nobody has heard of him either.

Jimmy Garlic

breatheme wrote: »

Agreed.



He's not going to be the president, he's going to be the INTERIM president as the CONSTITUTION states.

Only if the office of president is vacant, which it isn't.

Irish Praetorian

I'm sorry to interrupt this train of 'isn't the US just awful' but we seem to have hit upon a bit of a bug bear of mine, namely the rush to criticize the US for just about ever and any failure in the world without any sense of context or proportionately. I mean the Pol Pot comment above is just a perfect example of this; a Communist regime aided by the NVA and VC (whom the US was actively fighting at the time) with wider support from the Soviet blocs (Chinese and Russian) commits an enormous number of atrocities in a 3-year period, and then gets overthrown by its former Vietnamese allies, despite the arms and soldiers (10,000+) from China, who are in turn invaded by the Chinese for daring to destroy their puppet state - and people line up to lay blame at the feet of...the US? Is there some kind of pathological inability among people to consider the possibility that there are vile regimes that don't have or need the US? Or that the US isn't the magical root of all evil in the world?

The Saudi example is another good one, perhaps one of the few regimes in the world that this entire forum might actually agree is a pretty terrible one in both its domestic policy and its foreign adventures. We've seen how terrible it is to be any kind of minority in Saudi Arabia and we've all seen how pretty awful it is in Yemen. The problem? The Saudi's manage to do a pretty good job of being evil all on their own, in no small part to the mountain of black gold we all have the misfortune of finding them sitting on. With that kind of wealth they have the luxury of being able to pick their political patrons and right now that patron is the US. Can we argue it might be better for a nation purporting to be the head of 'the free world' to treat that regime as a rogue state - yes and I might make that argument myself. However, we have no shortage of examples in the world of nations far less wealthy than the Saudis surviving with the patronage of regimes with far less moral qualms than the US (see China and North Korea or Russia and Belarus) so much so that I doubt we have any remedy for the Saudi regime other than toppling it, which I cannot see anyone here supporting.

That brings us neatly to the issue of Venezuela, which in some respects seems to resemble this example of a resource rich nation persisting under the aegis of other political patrons (mostly Russia I believe). I don't think anyone can seriously dispute three key points. First, this is an example of a nation which has been ideologically mismanaged into the ground (economically atleast) in the pursuit of what initially were quite reasonable economic objectives but now have decayed into cronyism and malfeasance. Secondly, that in recent years the nation has suffered a considerable decline in its democratic institutions (at a time when a functioning democracy would typically express discontent at economic mismanagement), and I don't think there is a better example than comparing the election results of 2013 (which saw 7.5 million versus 7.2 million in votes for the two major parties) as compared with 2018 (which saw the Maduro regime getting 6.2 million votes and the opposition less than half that). And thirdly, that the country has sufficiently declined in the previous two categories to provoke a massive outflow of persons comparable to that of warzones like South Sudan or Afghanistan.

Given such factors, the question is how American involvement in the area could affect matters. My first instinct would be that the US could pursue the same line it does with other kleptocratic regimes protected by foreign patrons (again see China and North Korea or Russia and Belarus) and simply not involve itself, which has largely been the policy up until now, which the long term effects of Venezula's continual economic decline and mass emigration which has the problem of putting increasing strain on other nations in the region. The polar opposite to this is the (in my view) disastrous Iraq model of 'liberation' - essentially going in militarily, destroying the existing regime and attempting to set-up a replacement. This could work, but I think this creates the 'you break it you bought it' problem which is recurrent in US foreign policy where people will happily ascribe any failings in a nation to the US once such an intervention has begun (again not entirely an issue, people already tend to blame the US for anything and everything). More substantially though I think this has the serious moral problem of asking American soldiers to fight for Venezuelan liberty when Venezuelans themselves are apparently not willing or interested in doing so. So then we have the middle course which appears by in large to be US policy, whereby they recognize an alternative regime and hope it builds up enough steam to overthrow the existing one. Not the worst idea and the alternative regime has some legitimacy to it's claim, but ideally I think the US should try and pair this with some kind of 'Marshall Plan for Venezuela' in the event that the change goes smoothly. The danger here is that the situation devolves into a civil war, but I'm not entirely convinced that may not be a looming possibility in any case. The last option is of course to maintain the status quo and employ strict non-intervention (by which I mean non-US intervention because apparently intervention is fine so long as the guys carry AK's and not M16s) which looks like it might send Venezuela down the Belarus route, or risk a civil war as above. Not a great selection of options but if there are any other likely scenarios maybe people can point them out.

breatheme

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

Only if the office of president is vacant, which it isn't.

I explained this to you already, but since you need a reminder: You are sticking to the last lines of article 233, but when I say it is constitutional, I include the entire article 233, 333 and 350.

<SNIP>