Eat this Venezuela!

[David Floyd]

US hostages were taken at the Iranian embassy because the CIA, from the embassy, had overthrown a democratically elected government in Iran, and installed the Shah.

Sorry, fail. This was after the Shah was overthrown. Very few people, if ANYONE, at the embassy had a thing to do with that.

The US continues on the same course of diplomatic interference, and with the organization of illegal coups, in Iran and Venezuela. And when said countries respond to US aggression and interference, they're labeled "hostile" or "terrorists". It's absurd.

When the response is IEDs and suicide bombers, the label of "terrorism" is not absurd. As for Venezuela, there is no question they are hostile to the US, and for no good reason other than Chavez's dogmatic political philosophy. The people of Venezuela have more to gain with the US than against it.

Israel is routinely condemned for aggressive actions against Palestine. To paint their behavior as purely defensive is ridiculous. No rational person views it that way - only the ignorant consumers of Israeli propaganda, of which there is no shortage in the US media.

Routinely condemned - by the United Nations, which is entirely anti-Israel and anti-US. When nations like the Sudan are allowed seats on the UN Human Rights Commission, we have a little problem with objectivity, don't we? The UN is a joke, and a bad one, at that.

[HalfLotus]

When the response is IEDs and suicide bombers, the label of "terrorism" is not absurd.

Method of delivery is not the defining characteristic of terrorism.

As for Venezuela, there is no question they are hostile to the US, and for no good reason other than Chavez's dogmatic political philosophy.

Being socialist doesn't make them "hostile", it just makes them socialist.


Israel's activities are condemned by far more organizations and people than the UN.

[David Floyd]

Method of delivery is not the defining characteristic of terrorism.

Ummm, to some extent, it is. And when the method of delivery is a human suicide bomber on a civilian bus, then it is obviously terrorism. Hey - maybe you should volunteer for that. Too bad you have no balls

Being socialist doesn't make them "hostile", it just makes them socialist.

Good point, dip****. Socialism doesn't necessarily equal hostility. Unfortunately, Chavez's repeated statements and actions DO equal hostility. Idiot.

Israel's activities are condemned by far more organizations and people than the UN.

Too bad no one gives a ****. Allowing poor dictatorships an international voice is always a mistake, anyway. Face it: the only country that really matters is the US, currently. China, if they could get their **** together, would matter, as would the EU. But in the meantime, no one cares what ****ing Suriname thinks, and for that matter, no one cares what the Global South thinks. ****ing brown poor people

[HalfLotus]

If the US continues with its current economic and foreign policies, I suggest learning to love your new Chinese overlords in the near future.

[KrazyHorse]

Hey, less serious debate, more mocking Venezuela. Dammit, people, you're ruining my thread!

It's never a "serious" debate when Kiddy's involved.

[David Floyd]

True.

[Saras]

If the economy would have been planned there would never be any shortage.

There were no shortages in planned economies???

Thanks for circumventing my extremely exclusive ignore list (Kidicious and, on and off, Serb).

[Kidlicious]

It's never a "serious" debate when Kiddy's involved.

Indeed it's trivial to argue about whether rationing is better or using the price mechanism is better. The California energy crisis was caused by blood suckers. Which is why I'm not a communist anymore. For communism doesn't solve the problem of the blood sucker. The blood suckers just play the new game, because they can't play the old game.

Before I became a Christian I had to choose between secular ideologies that ignore the reality of good and evil. Adam Smith said, "I have never known much good to come from those who claim to trade for the public good." Marx assumed the same thing, that men are all selfish, void of love for his fellow man. Such a man is what Christians call evil. But it's not true that all men are evil. There are good men as well. However, evil men have no fear of God, so they are more capable in a secular environment.

I think you are a good person though because you have called me **** many many times, and you have repeatedly put me on your ignore list only to remove me from it everytime. If you were an evil blood sucker you would never talk to me but only about me. You would only put me down to other people and scorn me in public, but never say a word to my face. You would never have the guts to engage me in debate. In your heart you would pray that I left this site and never returned. In other words, you would have nothing but hate for me.

But the blood suckers get their's now, but will not get their's in heaven. They will cry out for mercy but they will not be granted it to them, because they had no mercy for others.

I don't know why you went into finance though. Science is an honorable profession, but finance is for blood suckers. At least you don't practice in your own land. In my country we have many blood suckers who practice in their own land.

[Flubber]

Interesting thread---

Leaving aside all the debate about things the US does or does not do elsewhere in the world, and focusing on Venezuela, I think the failures of Chavez will become more and more evident over time. For a time, super-inflated oil prices and the existing oil infrastructure were a bonanza to his economy. But in the longer run his inability to run the wonderfully rich oil resource his country is blessed with ( installing supporters and cronies in high positions replacing the experts and professionals that formerly held those positions) or to manage the economy properly should be his downfall. Venezuela has the resources to be a rich country. It should be prosperous NOW.

[Flubber]

to kid

I am happy to see you have finally acknowledged the failures and flaws of communism

[Flubber]

To halflotus

Do you really think the "Conspiracy of the Rich Everywhere" (COTRE) will permit any form of real US or global economic collapse? As I am sure you know, they only allow these various economic bubbles or crunches from time to time to

1. make money since they plan them
2. maintain the illusion of free markets and economies and
3. keep the rabble in line

Hyperinflation risks being too destabilizing so COTRE will never sign on.

[HalfLotus]

I agree they desire a certain level of stability, however the police-state apparatus in the US is quite advanced and can probably shut down an internal revolution.

If you read high level intelligence literature and stuff like Chatham House white papers, "the powers that be" know that this will be a revolutionary period for the western middle class and are very much prepared for it. Hence scaring people out of their wits via CIA/MI5/Mossad terr'ists and the subsequent eradication of privacy, civil liberties, etc, etc.

Here is a very interesting interview with our boy Soros. He talks about China, the Dollar, and a new global currency system - IMF SDRs in particular.

He says "a decline in the dollar is necessary" and calls it a "healthy but painful" period. He says "it could get out of hand", though it is preferable if it does not. China will be the new global economic "engine", the US will be a "drag", and so on.

He is very candid, and I would say that Soros knows a thing or two about economic and currency shifts.

[Solomwi]

Fantastic thread now that Kiddy and zakuHL have come on board.

[HalfLotus]

w00t

That Soros video is clutch, people should watch it.

[KaiserIsak]

There is really a lot of stuff i would want to comment in this thread, but to keep on with the overall topic of the thread, I will just ask a question or two.

First, from what I understand, the author of the thread (and a few others) seems to make fun out of Chavez and Venezuelas policy because they have to rationalize energy, while "in the US, when times are tough, people cut back on eating out, go without that new LED TV for an extra year, and watch expenses a little more."

So, to make fun of Chavez out of this situation, we would have to believe that it is the direct result of his policy that Venezuela is not on par with the US economically. Since we all know that Chavez seized power in 1999 from a government likened by the US and supporting everything he stands against now, it would then be logic to assume that Venezuela at that point should have been on economic level with the US (or at least closer than now). Strangely that was not the case. I wonder what is wrong with the argument?