Venezuelan Government Official Calls U.S. Threat Assessment “False and Dishonest�

[el comandante]

The administration of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez is part of a “small group of radical populist governments� that run counter to the “dominant trend� toward democracy in Latin America with a “competing vision that appeals to many of the region’s poor,� according to the Annual Threat Assessment of the United States Intelligence Community. Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell reported that Venezuela’s “continued regional activism� pushes an anti-U.S. message on other Latin American nations, sometimes financially.

"Inspired and supported by Venezuela and Cuba, leaders in Bolivia, Nicaragua and -more tentatively- Ecuador are pursuing agendas that undercut checks and balances on presidential power, seek lengthy presidential terms, weaken media and civil liberties, and emphasize economic nationalism at the expense of market-based approaches," McConnell testified before the U.S. Congress on February 5th.

Carlos Escarrá, the Vice President of the Foreign Affairs Commission of the Venezuelan National Assembly, called many aspects of the testimony “false, dishonest, and injurious.� He brought attention to the fact that the United States has invaded and kidnapped the presidents of Latin American countries and supported the April 2002 coup against President Hugo Chávez.

“Venezuela, on the other hand, in compliance with articles 152 and 153 of the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, has full respect for the sovereignty of other states,� Escarrá asserted.......

Another problem highlighted by the intelligence director is “the determination of the Cuban leadership to ignore outside pressure to carry out significant economic reforms,� which is “reinforced� by Venezuela`s support for its “key ideological ally.�

The report also expressed concern about the “rapport� that Chávez has built up with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Nicaraguan President Carlos Ortega, both of whom have been rivals of the United States since the 1980s. Venezuela and Nicaragua recently proposed a joint military force for Latin America, and inaugurated a corn processing plant intended to combat food shortages, facilitated by a technology transfer from Iran.

Venezuela’s National Assembly defended its policies, stating, “we believe in a multipolar world, where among equals we can construct a distinct humanity.�

President Chávez is “incapable of meddling with other countries,� Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa chimed in supportively, praising Chávez’s “sincere desire to help� and a firm commitment to Latin American integration and solidarity.


http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/3131

Is this cranking up the rhetoric a sign of things to come ? I worry that the US are looking to make moves as they did in 2002 to support the anti democracy coup against Chavez. It seems to me that certain officials are starting to create the justifications for overthrowing Chavez and as they tried before. With the failures of recent years in the middle east a return into the familiar territory of Latin America may seem like an easy option. There is no doubt that Latin America is rich in resources, particularly Venezuela and the US empire has a habit of popping up where resources are prevalent, particularly oil.

Am i right to be worried ? I think history suggests that i am.

[PatrickHenry]

Uncle Sam has a lot of swagger in the Americas.

But maybe the military isn't ready for more wars just now.

CIA, on the other hand...

[el comandante]

Uncle Sam has a lot of swagger in the Americas.

But maybe the military isn't ready for more wars just now.

CIA, on the other hand...

That is my main suspicion. I dont believe a full scale invasion is in the offing, but another coup perhaps so.

[Go Fish]

I agree, PatrickHenry. It IS time to assassinate Chavez. Great call!

[ViolaLee]

Go Fish, are you one of those Christian righties?

[el comandante]

Go Fish, are you one of those Christian righties?


Or just insane ?

[Tharagor]

Uncle Sam has a lot of swagger in the Americas.

But maybe the military isn't ready for more wars just now.

CIA, on the other hand...

That is my main suspicion. I dont believe a full scale invasion is in the offing, but another coup perhaps so.


Unfortunately I fear that you both are correct. We've been meddling in Latin America for almost a hundred years and there is little reasons to believe it's going to change any time soon.

What I find fascinating is that anyone thinks that the politics of Latin America needs to be included in the Annual Threat Assessment. Latin America has never and will never pose a threat to the United States, except perhaps economically if they continue to grow and mature as nations.


He brought attention to the fact that the United States has invaded and kidnapped the presidents of Latin American countries and supported the April 2002 coup against President Hugo Chávez.


These are facts (http://www.chavezthefilm.com/index_ex.htm) that the average citizen aught to know.

[Go Fish]

When I left the other board, my avatar was Jesus riding on a dinosaur. No, I am not. Chavez is Castro is Putin. Putin is Achmedinejad is (was) Arafat. Sorry guys, but I'm an American, through and through. Chavez being shot would certainly be a good thing for democracy worldwide, and for Americans specifically.
Socialism always fails. Let's take Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union as examples. How are they doing today? Why? Hitler's own people tried to kill him because they knew that socialism was destroying a once-great nation. The USSR had to be faced down and choked to death by President Reagan, even though the infection was so deeply embedded that Putin was able to float to the top. Call it a work in progress. Their military is impotent and their economy is in the shitter. We could own Russia with a few well-timed financial dealings. We could re-name it "Alaska II".
I'm just curious, but why the hell did you think that I am a Christian? I attack Islam because it is currently trying to eradicate my country. Whether they come from the Philippines, Canada, Chad, Botswana, or Boston, the fact is that the current goal of Islam is the destruction of everyone that doesn't swear their soul to Allah. Screw Allah. I don't have the time to worry about my "soul" when there are people in my city who are willing to give their life to kill me because of their religious beliefs. I worship at the "Church of Me".

[ttriber]

The administration of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez is part of a “small group of radical populist governments� that run counter to the “dominant trend� toward democracy in Latin America with a “competing vision that appeals to many of the region’s poor,� according to the Annual Threat Assessment of the United States Intelligence Community. Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell reported that Venezuela’s “continued regional activism� pushes an anti-U.S. message on other Latin American nations, sometimes financially.

"Inspired and supported by Venezuela and Cuba, leaders in Bolivia, Nicaragua and -more tentatively- Ecuador are pursuing agendas that undercut checks and balances on presidential power, seek lengthy presidential terms, weaken media and civil liberties, and emphasize economic nationalism at the expense of market-based approaches," McConnell testified before the U.S. Congress on February 5th.

Carlos Escarrá, the Vice President of the Foreign Affairs Commission of the Venezuelan National Assembly, called many aspects of the testimony “false, dishonest, and injurious.� He brought attention to the fact that the United States has invaded and kidnapped the presidents of Latin American countries and supported the April 2002 coup against President Hugo Chávez.

“Venezuela, on the other hand, in compliance with articles 152 and 153 of the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, has full respect for the sovereignty of other states,� Escarrá asserted.......

Another problem highlighted by the intelligence director is “the determination of the Cuban leadership to ignore outside pressure to carry out significant economic reforms,� which is “reinforced� by Venezuela`s support for its “key ideological ally.�

The report also expressed concern about the “rapport� that Chávez has built up with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Nicaraguan President Carlos Ortega, both of whom have been rivals of the United States since the 1980s. Venezuela and Nicaragua recently proposed a joint military force for Latin America, and inaugurated a corn processing plant intended to combat food shortages, facilitated by a technology transfer from Iran.

Venezuela’s National Assembly defended its policies, stating, “we believe in a multipolar world, where among equals we can construct a distinct humanity.�

President Chávez is “incapable of meddling with other countries,� Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa chimed in supportively, praising Chávez’s “sincere desire to help� and a firm commitment to Latin American integration and solidarity.


http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/3131

Is this cranking up the rhetoric a sign of things to come ? I worry that the US are looking to make moves as they did in 2002 to support the anti democracy coup against Chavez. It seems to me that certain officials are starting to create the justifications for overthrowing Chavez and as they tried before. With the failures of recent years in the middle east a return into the familiar territory of Latin America may seem like an easy option. There is no doubt that Latin America is rich in resources, particularly Venezuela and the US empire has a habit of popping up where resources are prevalent, particularly oil.

Am i right to be worried ? I think history suggests that i am.



Same Ole rhetoric from Chavez, The American people are evil and so is their government. Chavez has done nothing good but buy weapons from the russians and lend Cuba Oil for free. You tell me how a man like this can keep a country stable? He's lucky the US has no interest in South America because If they did they would of got rid of him long ago. Chavez is considered a bufoon in most of Latin America his ideas will only slow down the Venezuelan economy and put themselves in more debt.
Face it he lost that vote that he wanted so badly and he will trie again soon enough to get that vote so he can be dictator for life. But the people all ready voted and refused to accept him being dictator.

The Venezuelan people are smarter then Chavez thinks, If Chavez gets killed it won't be by the CIA, It will be by one of his own. He still doesn't have total controll of the Government and that is what he thrives for.

Imagine living in a country in which your Leader admires another Leader who has been dictator for over 50 years. That is what the venezuelen people are facing. The only thing Chavez has that he has kept his economy going is Oil and when that runs out he will break down.

[SouthernLadyGA]

GoFish...you heathen :)

[el comandante]

When I left the other board, my avatar was Jesus riding on a dinosaur. No, I am not. Chavez is Castro is Putin. Putin is Achmedinejad is (was) Arafat. Sorry guys, but I'm an American, through and through. Chavez being shot would certainly be a good thing for democracy worldwide, and for Americans specifically.


How can killing the democratically elected president of a country help democracy ? Think about it.

And the point you start calling the nazis socialist you lose all credibility

[Trish]

I'm just curious, but why the hell did you think that I am a Christian?


Because if you don't automatically fall into line with the politically correct views of some folks here you're either a liar, a fake, a neocon, a Christian (which, judging from the way the term is used here, means that you're delusional), ignorant, uneducated, and/or mentally impaired. Assigning you to a pigeon hole, whether you fit there or not, is a way of invalidating anything you might have to say - and invalidating you. Of course, you do have an advantage of having "Conservative" in your profile. That buys you a certain amount of leeway that you would not gain if you were a Democrat.

[jafar00]

I'm just curious, but why the hell did you think that I am a Christian? I attack Islam because it is currently trying to eradicate my country. Whether they come from the Philippines, Canada, Chad, Botswana, or Boston, the fact is that the current goal of Islam is the destruction of everyone that doesn't swear their soul to Allah.


Wow, way off topic there but I must interject. Your view of Islam is way off target. There is absolutely nothing in Islamic teachings of that nature.

The separatists in Philippines are just that. Separatists. The fact they just happen to be also majority Muslims is a moot point. They were there and they were Muslims before the Spanish invaded and created Christian Philippines, and until they obtain their dream of their own homeland, there will still be trouble there.

That's the trouble with colonialism. Somewhere along the line, you are bound to piss off the natives.

[el comandante]

Same Ole rhetoric from Chavez, The American people are evil and so is their government. Lets just deal with what has actually been said rather than making words up that were never uttered, can we manage that ?


Chavez has done nothing good but buy weapons from the russians and lend Cuba Oil for free. You tell me how a man like this can keep a country stable?

Take some time and learn about the country Chavez inherited. He inherited 30 years of recession, and now Venezuela has encountered 15 successive quarters of growth. The evidence suggests Chavez has got rid of the past instability and put the country on a steady path.

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/indicators


He's lucky the US has no interest in South America because If they did they would of got rid of him long ago.

The US has no interest in South America ??? Thats news to me. Why did they support the failed coup against Chavez in 2002 then ? Why have they overthrown governments from Guatemala to Chile to Nicaragua ?


Chavez is considered a bufoon in most of Latin America his ideas will only slow down the Venezuelan economy and put themselves in more debt.

Again just learn a bt about the things you criticise before you do. 15 successive quarters of growth is not slowing down an economy, it is an achievement in anyones book, particularly in a country in a 30 year recession.


Face it he lost that vote that he wanted so badly and he will trie again soon enough to get that vote so he can be dictator for life. But the people all ready voted and refused to accept him being dictator.

Do Britain, France, ASustralia and Canada all have dictators for life ??? Chavez only tried to amend the constitution to make the country more democratic, like these countries are.
The Venezuelan people are smarter then Chavez thinks, If Chavez gets killed it won't be by the CIA, It will be by one of his own. He still doesn't have total controll of the Government and that is what he thrives for.

Imagine living in a country in which your Leader admires another Leader who has been dictator for over 50 years. That is what the venezuelen people are facing. The only thing Chavez has that he has kept his economy going is Oil and when that runs out he will break down.


Really ?

The private sector, continued to be the major driving force in GDP growth, whose levels of activity grew by 11.1%;

http://www.bcv.org.ve/EnglishVersion/c4/index.asp?secc=pressreleases&Codigo=5924&Operacion=2&Sec=False

[ttriber]

Lets just deal with what has actually been said rather than making words up that were never uttered, can we manage that ?

When he went to the UN what did he say? "Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez tore into his U.S. counterpart and his U.N. hosts Wednesday, likening President Bush to the devil and telling the General Assembly that its system is "worthless."

"The devil came here yesterday," Chavez said, referring to Bush, who addressed the world body during its annual meeting Tuesday. "And it smells of sulfur still today."

Is this the man you want to support and claim your leader? This guy must be very educated in Marxism.



Take some time and learn about the country Chavez inherited. He inherited 30 years of recession, and now Venezuela has encountered 15 successive quarters of growth. The evidence suggests Chavez has got rid of the past instability and put the country on a steady path.

Steady path for more trouble. I see you as an outside observer searching for quick facts to parade on how Chavez is so great but have you talked to an insider in Venezuela about the misery the people face? Maybe you should search for Fushar's post and see what I mean by growing dictatorship by Mr.Chavez.

The US has no interest in South America ??? Thats news to me. Why did they support the failed coup against Chavez in 2002 then ? Why have they overthrown governments from Guatemala to Chile to Nicaragua ?

What failed coup the one Chavez claimed to have conquered. The one he claimed must of been sponsored by the US government. The one where their is no proof of. Is that the one your talking about? Because he has been saying this type of garbage since he gained power. Maybe you haven't heard his 8 hour speeches on how the US is the evil one. You should so you can become informed.

Do Britain, France, ASustralia and Canada all have dictators for life ??? Chavez only tried to amend the constitution to make the country more democratic, like these countries are.

Those countries are Democracies and have actual term limits,unlike Mr.Chavez who wants to be dictator for life. Chavez is trieng to do the same thing Castro did when he got the throne. Steal private property like hes all ready doing, put secret police in every neighborhood, have castro's spies come and teach his country some more submissive techniques on how to run his government. I can go on and on.


Imagine living in a country in which your Leader admires another Leader who has been dictator for over 50 years. That is what the venezuelen people are facing. The only thing Chavez has that he has kept his economy going is Oil and when that runs out he will break down.
Really?

Yes Really you look 90 miles south to Florida and you will see what Chavez is trieng to do to his people.

I will make sure to bring my buddy Fushar to talk to you about what I'm talking about he is from Venezuela and he will tell you the truth about what is happening their instead of hearing from leftist websites.

[el comandante]

When he went to the UN what did he say? "Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez tore into his U.S. counterpart and his U.N. hosts Wednesday, likening President Bush to the devil and telling the General Assembly that its system is "worthless."

George Bush is not the American people. And this statement by the government official was certainly not the same 'rhetoric' as Chavez speech you refer to.



Is this the man you want to support and claim your leader? This guy must be very educated in Marxism.

What do you want me to say, you have made a rather meaningless statement.


Steady path for more trouble. I see you as an outside observer searching for quick facts to parade on how Chavez is so great but have you talked to an insider in Venezuela about the misery the people face? Maybe you should search for Fushar's post and see what I mean by growing dictatorship by Mr.Chavez.

So you cant deny it. Venezuela is more stable and wealthy than any time in living memory.

Oh and one person can really give you an accurate account of public opinion in a country. I hate Tony Blair, but he was still elected by the British public 3 times. So whatever my opinion is, is not reflective of the majority of public opinion. You may be able to find an opponent of Chavez but there are 7 million Venezuelans who voted in favour of him. That far outweighs your one person.



What failed coup the one Chavez claimed to have conquered. The one he claimed must of been sponsored by the US government. The one where their is no proof of. Is that the one your talking about? Because he has been saying this type of garbage since he gained power. Maybe you haven't heard his 8 hour speeches on how the US is the evil one. You should so you can become informed.



Wayne Madsen, a former intelligence officer with the US navy, told the Guardian yesterday that American military attaches had been in touch with members of the Venezuelan military to examine the possibility of a coup.
"I first heard of Lieutenant Colonel James Rogers [the assistant military attache now based at the US embassy in Caracas] going down there last June to set the ground," Mr Madsen, an intelligence analyst, said yesterday. "Some of our counter-narcotics agents were also involved."

He said that the navy was in the area for operations unconnected to the coup, but that he understood they had assisted with signals intelligence as the coup was played out.

Mr Madsen also said that the navy helped with communications jamming support to the Venezuelan military, focusing on communications to and from the diplomatic missions in Caracas belonging to Cuba, Libya, Iran and Iraq - the four countries which had expressed support for Mr Chavez.

Navy vessels on a training exercise in the area were supposedly put on stand-by in case evacuation of US citizens in Venezuela was required......

In the past year, the United States has channeled hundreds of thousands of dollars in grants to US and Venezuelan groups opposed to Mr Chavez, including the labour group whose protests sparked off the coup. The funds were provided by the National Endowment for Democracy, a nonprofit agency created and financed by the US Congress.

The state department's human rights bureau is now examining whether one or more recipients of the money may have actively plotted against Mr Chavez.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,706802,00.html

or watch

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3739500579629840148


Those countries are Democracies and have actual term limits,unlike Mr.Chavez who wants to be dictator for life. Chavez is trieng to do the same thing Castro did when he got the throne. Steal private property like hes all ready doing, put secret police in every neighborhood, have castro's spies come and teach his country some more submissive techniques on how to run his government. I can go on and on.

You still dont get it. Yes they are democracies, but their leadership can seek re-election as often as they like. In all those countries you can stand for re-election after re-election after re-election, so long as the people still want you. In Britain Tony Blair was elected 3 times, but he could have been elected a 4th a 5th and a 6th if he kept running and was popular enough.


I will make sure to bring my buddy Fushar to talk to you about what I'm talking about he is from Venezuela and he will tell you the truth about what is happening their instead of hearing from leftist websites.

He has every right to oppose his goverment, but he should remember that there are 7 million of his country people who support the government. He has his democratic rights and they have theirs.

[Go Fish]

I'm just curious, but why the hell did you think that I am a Christian? I attack Islam because it is currently trying to eradicate my country. Whether they come from the Philippines, Canada, Chad, Botswana, or Boston, the fact is that the current goal of Islam is the destruction of everyone that doesn't swear their soul to Allah.


Wow, way off topic there but I must interject. Your view of Islam is way off target. There is absolutely nothing in Islamic teachings of that nature.

The separatists in Philippines are just that. Separatists. The fact they just happen to be also majority Muslims is a moot point. They were there and they were Muslims before the Spanish invaded and created Christian Philippines, and until they obtain their dream of their own homeland, there will still be trouble there.

That's the trouble with colonialism. Somewhere along the line, you are bound to piss off the natives.

So the train bombings in Spain, the riots in France, and the subway attacks in England had nothing in common with all the rest of the murders committed by Muslims over the past few decades? YGBSM! The common denominator is the religion. Ask Daniel Pearl. Oh, wait, he had his head hacked off...

[apdst]

There is absolutely nothing in Islamic teachings of that nature.

If that's the case, then why have Muslims been slaughtering people for the past 14 centuries, with no let up in sight?

They were there and they were Muslims before the Spanish invaded and created Christian Philippines

More revisionist history.

Islam didn't hit the Philippines until the 14th Century, introduced by Muslims merchants who set up sultanates within the islands. Aren't sultanates the Muslim equivalent to colonies? Currently, Muslims are only 5% of the population. That stands to reason, since the Filipinos are such sensable people.

[Buck Laser]

There is absolutely nothing in Islamic teachings of that nature.

If that's the case, then why have Muslims been slaughtering people for the past 14 centuries, with no let up in sight?

They were there and they were Muslims before the Spanish invaded and created Christian Philippines

More revisionist history.

Islam didn't hit the Philippines until the 14th Century, introduced by Muslims merchants who set up sultanates within the islands. Aren't sultanates the Muslim equivalent to colonies? Currently, Muslims are only 5% of the population. That stands to reason, since the Filipinos are such sensable people.

Apdst, I hate to be the one to have to tell you this, but if the Muslim merchants got to the Philippines in the 14th century, then they beat the Spaniards by at least a hundred years.:shock: How about you give us some more of your "revisionist" history? :madlaugh:

[BoogyMan]

When I left the other board, my avatar was Jesus riding on a dinosaur. No, I am not. Chavez is Castro is Putin. Putin is Achmedinejad is (was) Arafat. Sorry guys, but I'm an American, through and through. Chavez being shot would certainly be a good thing for democracy worldwide, and for Americans specifically.


How can killing the democratically elected president of a country help democracy ? Think about it.

And the point you start calling the nazis socialist you lose all credibility


Maybe you should do some reading comandante, National Socialism was the platform of the Nazi party. That being the case, Go Fish has a great deal of credibility with regard to the knowledge of history behind using the comment.

[Go Fish]

When I left the other board, my avatar was Jesus riding on a dinosaur. No, I am not. Chavez is Castro is Putin. Putin is Achmedinejad is (was) Arafat. Sorry guys, but I'm an American, through and through. Chavez being shot would certainly be a good thing for democracy worldwide, and for Americans specifically.


How can killing the democratically elected president of a country help democracy ? Think about it.

And the point you start calling the nazis socialist you lose all credibility


National Socialist Party. That was Hitler's "krewe". You seriously didn't know that the Nazi Party was socialist? Next you're going to tell me that you weren't aware that Chavez has been killing his political opponents. LMAO!

[el comandante]

Maybe you should do some reading comandante, National Socialism was the platform of the Nazi party. That being the case, Go Fish has a great deal of credibility with regard to the knowledge of history behind using the comment.


And North Korea is really called the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, that doesn't mean it's really democratic[hr]


When I left the other board, my avatar was Jesus riding on a dinosaur. No, I am not. Chavez is Castro is Putin. Putin is Achmedinejad is (was) Arafat. Sorry guys, but I'm an American, through and through. Chavez being shot would certainly be a good thing for democracy worldwide, and for Americans specifically.


How can killing the democratically elected president of a country help democracy ? Think about it.

And the point you start calling the nazis socialist you lose all credibility


National Socialist Party. That was Hitler's "krewe". You seriously didn't know that the Nazi Party was socialist? Next you're going to tell me that you weren't aware that Chavez has been killing his political opponents. LMAO!


That just takes you from the realm of little credibility into the absurd.

[Tharagor]

... National Socialism was the platform of the Nazi party.


Well, sort of. It was the stated platform of the Nazi party, but that was little more than politics. Hitler was not interested in helping the people of his nation. He did whatever he could to gain power and pursue an agenda of empire building.

Hitler wasn't socialist. He didn't nationalize industries, even those most important to the war effort. That's kind of telling.

I have to side with el comandante on this one. Just because they said they were socialists doesn't mean they were.

[BoogyMan]

... National Socialism was the platform of the Nazi party.


Well, sort of. It was the stated platform of the Nazi party, but that was little more than politics. Hitler was not interested in helping the people of his nation. He did whatever he could to gain power and pursue an agenda of empire building.

Hitler wasn't socialist. He didn't nationalize industries, even those most important to the war effort. That's kind of telling.

I have to side with el comandante on this one. Just because they said they were socialists doesn't mean they were.


NSDAP was certainly a socialist organization and it was the foundation for the Nazi party.

[Fishingriver]

If Hitler was really a socialist, then Bush is truly a conservative.

[potter]

I agree, PatrickHenry. It IS time to assassinate Chavez. Great call!


Anyone in our own government you think needs to be assasinated? Friends? Neighbors? Since you support assassinating people.....:shock:

Since you're a conservative you'd probably like to see Hillary and Obama assassinated right?

[Tharagor]

... National Socialism was the platform of the Nazi party.


Well, sort of. It was the stated platform of the Nazi party, but that was little more than politics. Hitler was not interested in helping the people of his nation. He did whatever he could to gain power and pursue an agenda of empire building.

Hitler wasn't socialist. He didn't nationalize industries, even those most important to the war effort. That's kind of telling.

I have to side with el comandante on this one. Just because they said they were socialists doesn't mean they were.


NSDAP was certainly a socialist organization and it was the foundation for the Nazi party.


So, by your analysis, the DPRK is not Communist because they call themselves Democratic.

:thumbsup:

Sorry, but if the Nazi party did not nationalize wartime industry, especially BMW, one cannot make a good claim that it was socialistic.

My contention is that it rode the coat-tails of growing socialistic movements for purely political aims and was not truly socialistic. It may have socialized some industries, but not to have socialized BMW is a strong argument against the Nazi party having been a true socialistic party.

[BoogyMan]

So, by your analysis, the DPRK is not Communist because they call themselves Democratic.

:thumbsup:

Sorry, but if the Nazi party did not nationalize wartime industry, especially BMW, one cannot make a good claim that it was socialistic.

My contention is that it rode the coat-tails of growing socialistic movements for purely political aims and was not truly socialistic. It may have socialized some industries, but not to have socialized BMW is a strong argument against the Nazi party having been a true socialistic party.


We are not talking about the DPRK Tharagor, are we?

We ARE however talking about the socialistic origins of the Nazi party. Your demand that wartime industry must have been nationalized for the NSDAP to have been a socialist organization is little more than logical fallacy.

Yes, Hitler did change the focus of the Nazi party to exclude the socialists with his fuhrenprizip, but there is no denying that the Nazi party arose out of socialist ideologies.

[el comandante]

Sorry, but if the Nazi party did not nationalize wartime industry, especially BMW, one cannot make a good claim that it was socialistic.

I think that is the key point. Socialism depends on mass nationalisation, if you dont do that, especially in war time then you cant be socialist.

I think to call the Nazi's socialist is like calling the Labour party here in Britain socialist. They may have been socialist in name, not by the nature of their actions.

[Tharagor]

We are not talking about the DPRK Tharagor, are we?

We ARE however talking about the socialistic origins of the Nazi party. Your demand that wartime industry must have been nationalized for the NSDAP to have been a socialist organization is little more than logical fallacy.

Yes, Hitler did change the focus of the Nazi party to exclude the socialists with his fuhrenprizip, but there is no denying that the Nazi party arose out of socialist ideologies.


You are correct, we are not talking about the DPRK. I was using it as an example of the inaccuracy of your logic.

Yes, the Nazi party was started as a nominally socialistic group. I use the term nominally because it was in name only, not practice.

Essentially what you are saying is that they were socialistic because they said they were.

What I am saying is, I don't care what ideology a group claims, they're actions speak far louder than their words. If a group does not implement socialistic reforms they're claims of socialism are little more than that, claims.

The Nazi party used socialism to gain support and power because socialistic movements were very popular at the time. They also knew that claiming to be socialistic would help encourage Germans tired of the post-WW I sanctions to join the party and drive the machine.

I encourage you to debate my logic if you think I'm wrong, but try debating the logic please.

[BoogyMan]

We are not talking about the DPRK Tharagor, are we?

We ARE however talking about the socialistic origins of the Nazi party. Your demand that wartime industry must have been nationalized for the NSDAP to have been a socialist organization is little more than logical fallacy.

Yes, Hitler did change the focus of the Nazi party to exclude the socialists with his fuhrenprizip, but there is no denying that the Nazi party arose out of socialist ideologies.


You are correct, we are not talking about the DPRK. I was using it as an example of the inaccuracy of your logic.

Yes, the Nazi party was started as a nominally socialistic group. I use the term nominally because it was in name only, not practice.

Essentially what you are saying is that they were socialistic because they said they were.

What I am saying is, I don't care what ideology a group claims, they're actions speak far louder than their words. If a group does not implement socialistic reforms they're claims of socialism are little more than that, claims.

The Nazi party used socialism to gain support and power because socialistic movements were very popular at the time. They also knew that claiming to be socialistic would help encourage Germans tired of the post-WW I sanctions to join the party and drive the machine.

I encourage you to debate my logic if you think I'm wrong, but try debating the logic please.


Tharagor, you are trying to setup a scenario where there is no room for debate, but it isn't going to work. You as much as admitted that you setup a strawman of what I was saying and you continue to take shots at the strawman.

The NSDAP was a socialist organization from which Hitler built the Nazi party. It is correct to say that the Nazi party arose out of the wreckage of socialism in Germany.

[Matt W]

Just out of curiousity, are we ever going to get back to Venezuela?

[Tharagor]

Tharagor, you are trying to setup a scenario where there is no room for debate, but it isn't going to work. You as much as admitted that you setup a strawman of what I was saying and you continue to take shots at the strawman.

The NSDAP was a socialist organization from which Hitler built the Nazi party. It is correct to say that the Nazi party arose out of the wreckage of socialism in Germany.


No stawman here. I agree that NSDAP was a self-proclaimed Socialist organization. The problem is, you claim that since they called themselves socialist they were. I claim that the proof is in the pudding.

Just because they said they were socialistic doesn't mean they were.

That's why I gave the example of the DPRK. They claim to be Democratic, at least by their name, does that make it true? By your logic it would.

[BoogyMan]

No stawman here. I agree that NSDAP was a self-proclaimed Socialist organization. The problem is, you claim that since they called themselves socialist they were. I claim that the proof is in the pudding.

Just because they said they were socialistic doesn't mean they were.

That's why I gave the example of the DPRK. They claim to be Democratic, at least by their name, does that make it true? By your logic it would.


Lets approach this from a different angle since you deny history and documented fact. Prove that the NSDAP was NOT a socialist group Tharagor, even though they themselves and history hold them up as having been so.

[Tharagor]

Lets approach this from a different angle since you deny history and documented fact. Prove that the NSDAP was NOT a socialist group Tharagor, even though they themselves and history hold them up as having been so.


I have already done so. There was no large scale nationalization of industry. I specifically used the example of BMW. BMW was one of the most important business to the German war effort. They made the airplanes that were essential to the German war effort.

I'm not denying documented fact. I am agreeing with you that they said they were socialistic. I also agree that some history books stop simply at that and go no further.

However, any sophisticated analysis would also include their actions. They did not act as socialists do. They did not nationalize industry, even industries that were essential to their war effort, which are usually the first to be nationalized.

What part of that doesn't make sense?

I apologize, I am trying to be as polite as I can. Just consider the logic and don't get bogged down in, "well this book says this" or "they said they were socialist".

It's also important to remember that movements and politician will make many claims in order to achieve their ends. They don't necessarily have to believe their own claims or even intend to live up to them.

As far as history is concerned, one needs to consider the context of the history and the bias the author or expected bias the reader may have. Beyond date/action, history becomes largely subjective. The economic beliefs of the Nazi party are just one example of many.

Can it be proven that the Nazi were or weren't socialistic? Of course not. However, there is a much stranger argument that they weren't true socialists by their actions.

[BoogyMan]

The gist of your argument is that socialism cannot happen without broad scale nationalization, a claim that you have yet to support. My whole argument in this regard, which you seem to have twisted, is that the Nazi party rose from the ashes of the socialist NSDAP. The NSDAP was not large enough to nationalize ANYTHING and your denial of their claim to socialism when history points to the fact that the National Socialist German Workers party claimed and held to socialist ideologies doesn't make any sense.

[Tharagor]

The gist of your argument is that socialism cannot happen without broad scale nationalization, a claim that you have yet to support.


:dizzy:

What makes a political party socialistic if not nationalization of industry? Socialism implies central planning, which implies nationalization of industry.


My whole argument in this regard, which you seem to have twisted, is that the Nazi party rose from the ashes of the socialist NSDAP. The NSDAP was not large enough to nationalize ANYTHING and your denial of their claim to socialism when history points to the fact that the National Socialist German Workers party claimed and held to socialist ideologies doesn't make any sense.


You made the claim that since the NSDAP claimed to be socialistic and since the Nazi party arose from the ashes of the NSDAP they were socialistic too.

I made the claim that the Nazi party, which controlled Germany, did not nationalize industry and thus could be called nominally Socialistic at best.

I've twisted nothing. I'm merely calling your attention to important data you appear to be overlooking.

[BoogyMan]

My claim is that the Nazi party arose from the NSDAP (a socialist group). You wish to argue vagueries with regard to socialism and demand that I accept your limitations upon what could be considered socialist when history stands to disagree with you.

I am overlooking nothing here my friend, I am simply using history to make my point.

[PatrickHenry]

Nazism was a form of fascism.

Fascism and socialism are both tyrannies in which the state has rights but the individual is disregarded.

But Fascismâ‰*Socialism.

Can you find a credible source that asserts that Fascism=Socialism?

[Tharagor]

My claim is that the Nazi party arose from the NSDAP (a socialist group). You wish to argue vagueries with regard to socialism and demand that I accept your limitations upon what could be considered socialist when history stands to disagree with you.

I am overlooking nothing here my friend, I am simply using history to make my point.


I clearly asked you if nationalization of industry is the hallmark of socialism, what is. What did the Nazi party do, besides rise from a claimed socialistic organization, to be considered a socialistic party? Did the Nazi's do anything to dismantle the capitalistic economy of Germany?

You are relying on subjective history and ignoring direct evidence.

It takes more than claiming to be or rising from a socialistic group to actually be socialistic.

Also, history is not a thing, it is an interpretation of events, nothing more. The interpretation of events can and do change.

[BoogyMan]

Tharagor, it is a historical FACT that the NSDAP was a socialist party which Hitler coopted. Subjective history? Egads.

Take a look at Hitler's own writings with regard to the NSDAP.
http://www.hitler.org/writings/programme/

Pay special attention to party platform 7

7. We demand that the State shall make it its primary duty to provide a livelihood for its citizens. If it should prove impossible to feed the entire population, foreign nationals (non-citizens) must be deported from the Reich.

Let us not leave out party platform 10 either

10. It must be the first duty of every citizen to perform physical or mental work. The activities of the individual must not clash with the general interest, but must proceed within the framework of the community and be for the general good.

But wait, theres more. Lets look at party platform 13

13. We demand the nationalization of all businesses which have been formed into corporations (trusts).

Read the whole thing though, it reeks of socialist ideology.

[Fishingriver]

No stawman here. I agree that NSDAP was a self-proclaimed Socialist organization. The problem is, you claim that since they called themselves socialist they were. I claim that the proof is in the pudding.

Just because they said they were socialistic doesn't mean they were.

That's why I gave the example of the DPRK. They claim to be Democratic, at least by their name, does that make it true? By your logic it would.


Lets approach this from a different angle since you deny history and documented fact. Prove that the NSDAP was NOT a socialist group Tharagor, even though they themselves and history hold them up as having been so.


Can you prove that George W Bush is not a genuine conservative?

[Tharagor]

Tharagor, it is a historical FACT that the NSDAP was a socialist party which Hitler coopted. Subjective history? Egads.

Take a look at Hitler's own writings with regard to the NSDAP.
http://www.hitler.org/writings/programme/

Pay special attention to party platform 7

7. We demand that the State shall make it its primary duty to provide a livelihood for its citizens. If it should prove impossible to feed the entire population, foreign nationals (non-citizens) must be deported from the Reich.

Let us not leave out party platform 10 either

10. It must be the first duty of every citizen to perform physical or mental work. The activities of the individual must not clash with the general interest, but must proceed within the framework of the community and be for the general good.

But wait, theres more. Lets look at party platform 13

13. We demand the nationalization of all businesses which have been formed into corporations (trusts).

Read the whole thing though, it reeks of socialist ideology.


Their literature may reek of socialist ideology. The original point was that the Nazi's weren't socialist, not the NSDAP.

You're contention was that since the Nazi party came from the NSDAP, the Nazi's had to be socialist as well.

I simply pointed the the actions of the Nazi's to indicate that while the Nazi's may have called themselves socialist, they never did anything to prove they were.

Absence of such proof, one must conclude that the Nazi's used the concept of socialism to make it easier to take power and pursue a policy of empire building in Europe.

Did you forget how this thread started?


Posted by Tharagor - Yesterday 10:09 PM

... National Socialism was the platform of the Nazi party.


Well, sort of. It was the stated platform of the Nazi party, but that was little more than politics. Hitler was not interested in helping the people of his nation. He did whatever he could to gain power and pursue an agenda of empire building.

Hitler wasn't socialist. He didn't nationalize industries, even those most important to the war effort. That's kind of telling.

I have to side with el comandante on this one. Just because they said they were socialists doesn't mean they were.

[BoogyMan]

Wow fishingriver, where did I make that argument?

HINT:
I didn't

[Matt W]

So much for the topic, hmm?

[BoogyMan]

I remember exactly how the thread started Tharagor and I also sadly see that you are trying to twist my words. My argument has been and still is that the platform of the Nazi party was National Socialism and that party sprung from the NSDAP who were definitively socialist.

Hitler coopted the group and ran with the furerprinzip view of the group which eschewed socialists. In any case, socialism is where it all started.

[Fishingriver]

I remember exactly how the thread started Tharagor and I also sadly see that you are trying to twist my words. My argument has been and still is that the platform of the Nazi party was National Socialism and that party sprung from the NSDAP who were definitively socialist.

Hitler coopted the group and ran with the furerprinzip view of the group which eschewed socialists. In any case, socialism is where it all started.



My question to you is that if you consider Hitler to be a socialist, then wouldn't Bush (by your interpretation) be a conservative?

[BoogyMan]

Fishingriver, your premise is flawed as I have repeatedly stated that the ROOTS of the Nazi party are socialist.

[Fishingriver]

Fishingriver, your premise is flawed as I have repeatedly stated that the ROOTS of the Nazi party are socialist.


I'll take that as a "yes".

[Tharagor]

I remember exactly how the thread started Tharagor and I also sadly see that you are trying to twist my words. My argument has been and still is that the platform of the Nazi party was National Socialism and that party sprung from the NSDAP who were definitively socialist.

Hitler coopted the group and ran with the furerprinzip view of the group which eschewed socialists. In any case, socialism is where it all started.


I twisted nothing. There is no logic to the concept that since the Nazi party came from the NSDAP they had to be socialistic. They should clearly be judged by their actions.

Consider them capitalists in Socialists clothing. They pretended to be socialists to make it easy for them to gain power. In reality, they did not support the socialist agenda.

You can point to all the books you want. Unless you can clearly show socialistic activity other than claims they may have made, you have no justification for your claim.

[ttriber]

Boogy Sometimes I see no point in arguing with these left wing nuts. Just like the guy who idolizes Castro and now Chavez their all the same most of them have never been to the country or lived their, what the hell do they know. They just gather info from some leftist website and use it to further their goal of how great socialism is and communism. When It has failed and has failed miserably. Why can't the cubans travel? A young Cuban asked that to Alarcon and the video leaked out and guess what the Communist in Cuba arrested the young man and put him on national tv to say he never said those words. That is what the op is supporting and this other nut head.

[Tharagor]

Boogy Sometimes I see no point in arguing with these left wing nuts. Just like the guy who idolizes Castro and now Chavez their all the same most of them have never been to the country or lived their, what the hell do they know. They just gather info from some leftist website and use it to further their goal of how great socialism is and communism. When It has failed and has failed miserably. Why can't the cubans travel? A young Cuban asked that to Alarcon and the video leaked out and guess what the Communist in Cuba arrested the young man and put him on national tv to say he never said those words. That is what the op is supporting and this other nut head.


In other words, you're encouraging Boogy to to ignore clear obvious logic?

If you're going to enter into the conversation at least try to contribute something of value.

Either you can debate the logic or you can't.

[el comandante]

Why can't the cubans travel?

And why can't Americans travel to Cuba ? It's not like you exactly have freedom of movement either.

[BoogyMan]

I remember exactly how the thread started Tharagor and I also sadly see that you are trying to twist my words. My argument has been and still is that the platform of the Nazi party was National Socialism and that party sprung from the NSDAP who were definitively socialist.

Hitler coopted the group and ran with the furerprinzip view of the group which eschewed socialists. In any case, socialism is where it all started.


I twisted nothing. There is no logic to the concept that since the Nazi party came from the NSDAP they had to be socialistic. They should clearly be judged by their actions.

Consider them capitalists in Socialists clothing. They pretended to be socialists to make it easy for them to gain power. In reality, they did not support the socialist agenda.

You can point to all the books you want. Unless you can clearly show socialistic activity other than claims they may have made, you have no justification for your claim.


And yet again you twist my words. I will repeat it once more for you. The Nazi party and National Socialism had its ROOTS in a socialist organization called the NSDAP.

I showed you the aims of the NSDAP by means of historical documentation and you still twist my comments. The fact that the NSDAP was socialist is fact.

Enjoy arguing with yourself as this is no longer worthy of my time.

[Tharagor]

I remember exactly how the thread started Tharagor and I also sadly see that you are trying to twist my words. My argument has been and still is that the platform of the Nazi party was National Socialism and that party sprung from the NSDAP who were definitively socialist.

Hitler coopted the group and ran with the furerprinzip view of the group which eschewed socialists. In any case, socialism is where it all started.


I twisted nothing. There is no logic to the concept that since the Nazi party came from the NSDAP they had to be socialistic. They should clearly be judged by their actions.

Consider them capitalists in Socialists clothing. They pretended to be socialists to make it easy for them to gain power. In reality, they did not support the socialist agenda.

You can point to all the books you want. Unless you can clearly show socialistic activity other than claims they may have made, you have no justification for your claim.


And yet again you twist my words. I will repeat it once more for you. The Nazi party and National Socialism had its ROOTS in a socialist organization called the NSDAP.

I showed you the aims of the NSDAP by means of historical documentation and you still twist my comments. The fact that the NSDAP was socialist is fact.

Enjoy arguing with yourself as this is no longer worthy of my time.


Yes, you showed me roots and the ignored everything else as if it didn't matter.

I twisted nothing.

I did not dispute the policies of the NSDAP, only the Nazi party.

:thumbsup:

[ttriber]

Why can't the cubans travel?

And why can't Americans travel to Cuba ? It's not like you exactly have freedom of movement either.


Pretty easy because they don't want to support a government who has kept the same government for 50 years with the same old dictator who has killed an pillaged his own people. If you want to go to cuba and your a US citizen you can every 3 years I think the rule is. Maybe you haven't seen the video that was captured about a young cuban who complained to the regime on how he can never leave cuba because of his own government and can never travel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwWWFeBVN_I

BBC video.

Your communist propraganda will not live up in this forum my friend because I will not tolerate anyone who supports a Communist Dictator. You will be judged one day.

[el comandante]

Pretty easy because they don't want to support a government who has kept the same government for 50 years with the same old dictator who has killed an pillaged his own people. If you want to go to cuba and your a US citizen you can every 3 years I think the rule is. Maybe you haven't seen the video that was captured about a young cuban who complained to the regime on how he can never leave cuba because of his own government and can never travel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwWWFeBVN_I

BBC video.

Your communist propraganda will not live up in this forum my friend because I will not tolerate anyone who supports a Communist Dictator. You will be judged one day.


Just like you need permission to go to Cuba, Cubans need the same to travel.

"Condemn me, it does not matter, history will absolve me.� - Fidel Castro

[ttriber]

Wrong Comparison because anywhere else to Europe and other nations you don't need to get permission to go to those countries. Of course you need a passport but do you go and ask the government to permit you to fly to so and so place absolutely not. It's different with cuba because of the dictatorship and 50 years of tyranny Castro has done.
I laugh at people like yourself who admire a man who has done so many deaths,broken up families, people's lifes completely turned upside down. It is quite funny to see a fellow who loves Castro but has never ever been and lived in Cuba and seen how the people must survive eat from trash dumps just an ordinary joe trieng to survive. I guess its hard enough to look at any website that has facts the Castro government dosen't want you to know. It is tragic to see a person like yourself accept propraganda and accept it as a truth.

[el comandante]

Wrong Comparison because anywhere else to Europe and other nations you don't need to get permission to go to those countries. Of course you need a passport but do you go and ask the government to permit you to fly to so and so place absolutely not. It's different with cuba because of the dictatorship and 50 years of tyranny Castro has done.
I laugh at people like yourself who admire a man who has done so many deaths,broken up families, people's lifes completely turned upside down. It is quite funny to see a fellow who loves Castro but has never ever been and lived in Cuba and seen how the people must survive eat from trash dumps just an ordinary joe trieng to survive. I guess its hard enough to look at any website that has facts the Castro government dosen't want you to know. It is tragic to see a person like yourself accept propraganda and accept it as a truth.


With all due respect this is all just nonsense. Firstly, President Castro is not a dictator or a tyrant. Cuba is a revolutionary democracy.

Secondly, all that trash dump talk belongs in a trash dump, or at least not to be spread from the pages and screens of trashy propahanda outlets.

Fidel castro took an illeterate nation and made it literate. He inherited a country rife with racism, Nelson Mandela then congratulated Cuba for being the first to eradicate racism. When my government and your government were doing business with the racist apartheid regime, Cuban troops were on the ground in Angola fighting them. In fact a country of 11,ooo,ooo there are almost as many black doctors than in the entire US.

He took a population where there was a mega rich and people who didnt have enough to even eat. Now everyone in Cuba has enough to live on.

Before the revolution [QUOTE=] life expectancy in Cuba was under 59 years, while in developed nations people lived an average of 66 years. [QUOTE] Now life expectancy is 77 years.

http://cubajournal.blogspot.com/2006/07/cuba-life-expectancy-now-at-77.html

And now Cuba has roughly the same infant mortality rate as the US. A few years ago Cuba was actually lower, and i dont know if this has changed.

Surely you must be able to see Cuba is punching above its weight. Fidel has been a saviour for Cubans and the impoverished the world over.

[Tharagor]

Pretty easy because they don't want to support a government who has kept the same government for 50 years with the same old dictator who has killed an pillaged his own people. If you want to go to cuba and your a US citizen you can every 3 years I think the rule is.


He is certainly better than Batista, who he replaced when he led the revolution.

He's also nowhere near as universally reviled than some make him out to be.


Your communist propraganda will not live up in this forum my friend because I will not tolerate anyone who supports a Communist Dictator. You will be judged one day.


Neither will your anti-communist propaganda. Also, it appears that el comandante is being judged now, not later.

Who do you expect to judge him later and why later?

[potter]

Boogy Sometimes I see no point in arguing with these left wing nuts. Just like the guy who idolizes Castro and now Chavez their all the same most of them have never been to the country or lived their, what the hell do they know.

Ttriber, how many years did you live in Cuba and Venezuela?[hr]

"Condemn me, it does not matter, history will absolve me.� - Fidel Castro


:ecstatic: Isn't this exactly what Bush keep saying? :ecstatic:

[Matt W]

Feel free to head the topic back to Venezuela, anytime... ;)

[DANG]

Heh, Matt. Hows it goin? What are you up to today?

On topic:


I'm just curious, but why the hell did you think that I am a Christian?


Because if you don't automatically fall into line with the politically correct views of some folks here you're either a liar, a fake, a neocon, a Christian (which, judging from the way the term is used here, means that you're delusional), ignorant, uneducated, and/or mentally impaired. Assigning you to a pigeon hole, whether you fit there or not, is a way of invalidating anything you might have to say - and invalidating you. Of course, you do have an advantage of having "Conservative" in your profile. That buys you a certain amount of leeway that you would not gain if you were a Democrat.
Or maybe because you advocate the assassination of a duly elected leader of a Nation who happens to LOVE their president (not unlike JFK).... in exactly the same irrational terms of a reich-wing Christo-fascist by the name of Pat Robertson!!!
Thats why you were asked if you are a christian. Funny how you guys want to crucify beloved innocent people.... it worked out so well for you 2000 years ago.....Fúckin-A, Lets do it again!!!

We dont need no goddamned courts either..... just "Take him out!!"~ Pat Robertson[hr]Do you Pat Robertson parrots approve of the Bhutto assassination, also?[hr]Cheney wants to bomb Venezuela for the same reason as Iraq and Iran.

Lets see if YOU can do simple math.
Whats oil the oil common oil denominator?

Thats why Robertson was not officially criticized.

[Tharagor]

Feel free to head the topic back to Venezuela, anytime... ;)


It would be easier if it was ever really about Venezuela specifically. These discussions tend to devolve into capitalism vs. socialism debate.

[el comandante]

Feel free to head the topic back to Venezuela, anytime... ;)


It would be easier if it was ever really about Venezuela specifically. These discussions tend to devolve into capitalism vs. socialism debate.


That is because the critics find it hard to find fault with Venezuela. Instead they will criticise Cuba, or China or Stalin, as if these are all somehow the same as Venezuela

[ttriber]

Feel free to head the topic back to Venezuela, anytime... ;)


It would be easier if it was ever really about Venezuela specifically. These discussions tend to devolve into capitalism vs. socialism debate.


That is because the critics find it hard to find fault with Venezuela. Instead they will criticise Cuba, or China or Stalin, as if these are all somehow the same as Venezuela


Cuba has been crumbling since the early 60's since Castro has taken power. Ever since the embargo the cubans have been a down right disaster. Especially when you have 50 years of the same leader and same policys. The policy's the US has done has worked because the communists in cuba are scared shitting bricks, they now have property in spain and france. Wonder why they have property over their when their people are suffering.. Hmmm, maybe because they steal the money they get and advance it for their own wealth rather then for the peoples wealth. For over 50 years the same ole rhetoric and the same ole policy's.

Venezuela is becoming another cuba that is exactly why this goes into a cuba discussion or a communist discussion.

Communism sounds great on paper, it should of stayed in Marx's manifesto. But it has taken shape in real life and the only thing that has come out of it is dictatorships after dictatorships.

[el comandante]

Feel free to head the topic back to Venezuela, anytime... ;)


It would be easier if it was ever really about Venezuela specifically. These discussions tend to devolve into capitalism vs. socialism debate.


That is because the critics find it hard to find fault with Venezuela. Instead they will criticise Cuba, or China or Stalin, as if these are all somehow the same as Venezuela


Cuba has been crumbling since the early 60's since Castro has taken power. Ever since the embargo the cubans have been a down right disaster. Especially when you have 50 years of the same leader and same policys. The policy's the US has done has worked because the communists in cuba are scared shitting bricks, they now have property in spain and france. Wonder why they have property over their when their people are suffering.. Hmmm, maybe because they steal the money they get and advance it for their own wealth rather then for the peoples wealth. For over 50 years the same ole rhetoric and the same ole policy's.

Venezuela is becoming another cuba that is exactly why this goes into a cuba discussion or a communist discussion.

Communism sounds great on paper, it should of stayed in Marx's manifesto. But it has taken shape in real life and the only thing that has come out of it is dictatorships after dictatorships.



Sorry but i find it hard to take seriously that Venezuela is somehow communist and that Cuba is 'crumbling'. They are both laughable suggestions and need elaboration.