Sand
Footballguy
One naturally leads to the other. In fact, I can't think of a time it didn't. Quickest way to become a billionaire is to run a socialist country.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Venezuela -- Socialism Destroyed It (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter rockaction
- Start date
ren hoek
Footballguy
What was false about the program? Where did Dore deny the impact of sanctions? I watched it last night and didn’t notice anything out of line with what I’ve been saying.
Mate’ has bylines at Democracy Now, The Nation, The Intercept, Vice. He did a lot of good work at The Real News as well.
Maduro has not closed down the border to international aid. The Red Cross and UN have been providing aid for a long time. So have China and Russia. The bridge between VZ and Colombia was never opened since its construction in 2016 due to ongoing tensions between the two.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/venezuela-bridge-aid-pompeo-1.5018432
If they actually want to deliver aid to Venezuelan people, and not just use it as a PR stunt to put cruise ships and military planes on the border and militarize the opposition like they’ve done over and over again to other regime change targets, they can go through the Red Cross or UN. They are right to be skeptical of this “aid”.
Red Cross and UN have requested that they stop politicizing aid. Not only because it’s a cynical ploy to manufacture consent for an invasion, but because it endangers actual aid workers in high risk areas.
Again, maybe you are right that the Maduro admin is collapsing under its own weight. But if they give a #### at all about Venezuelans they need to end the sanctions, return the $1.2 billion stolen by the Bank of England to the Venezuelan treasury, and work through neutral humanitarian orgs to administer aid and broker a peaceful transition.
Guaido is just parroting Mike Pence with his ‘it is time for action, not dialogue’ talk. They’re not doing any favors to a diplomatic resolution either.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
You and I are making totally different points about the content. I'll drop it, I certainly recognize your point.
The point was just about Dore starting with snips of propaganda, then jaw agape is off and running from there. He did the same thing in another piece by pointing to Abrams and then wildly dragging in the 'western world' along with him. He is, after all, a comedian. He's an inherently funny guy but I don't have to take policy points from him.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
My point here was that, yes the bridge was closed 2016, but also other border points were closed off even before that, IIRC 2015. The bridge isn't the only siphon for aid or commerce. And its' really not aid, it's commerce that is impaired. The economy is cadaverous.
There is probably a way out of this and it involves free, fair and totally open elections with international monitoring and under the VZ Constitution, which of course gives management of elections to the Assembly. I'm guessing that has been put before Maduro more than once. All he has to do is do that and agree to leave office by a certain date if he loses. I think that will do it.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
But worry not, as this administration is bad at diplomacy, so Maduro probably isn't going anywhere.
- Apparently primarily it's just Mexico and Italy calling for this, but I would be fine with it, so long as the elections are free (all opposition allowed), fair, monitored, regulated by the Assembly, and with a deadline for Maduro to leave office if he loses, which he must agree to.
Last edited by a moderator:
Franknbeans
Footballguy
It's hard to defend Elliot Abrams being any way involved with our foreign policy efforts.
ren hoek
Footballguy
Didn't mean to talk past you. I hadn't watched the video yet when I posted about the bolivar. Just not following your comment about propaganda- he's actually out there on the ground in VZ. Do you think he is just telling lies or something? Just struck me as an unfair characterization is all.SaintsInDome2006 said:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Quite alright, nature of the medium. - I haven’t mentioned Mate. I was talking about the woman before him. I’ve seen Mate wrt the Russia investigation, but at any rate I wasn’t commenting on that.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Aid is coming through.
>>A convoy of trucks carrying humanitarian assistance for Venezuela will be unloaded at the Simon Bolivar bridge on Colombia's side of the border and the aid will be transported by a human chain across the frontier, Colombia's migration agency said on Saturday.<<
>>A convoy of trucks carrying humanitarian assistance for Venezuela will be unloaded at the Simon Bolivar bridge on Colombia's side of the border and the aid will be transported by a human chain across the frontier, Colombia's migration agency said on Saturday.<<
![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
The Assembly’s point is there is no legally appointed president right now, so no I don’t think that’s the view of the opposition. I’m not sure what happens with Guaidó. Thought the deadline was for Maduro to respond in some way by stepping down or by calling new elections, and then the Assembly would determine the next stage. But I’m not sure on that.
badmojo1006
Footballguy
Maybe this was asked before, but why does Trump care about Venezuela?
Is it the oil?
Is it the oil?
The Z Machine
Footballguy
Shula-holic
Footballguy
I'm not saying you're wrong, I don't know. But what would we have Trump do here if we could choose? I think what he's done so far I would agree with. I'm not a fan of sending troops to Colombia or anything like that.
Last edited by a moderator:
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
These the same trucks (carrying food & medicine) that were burned by gov troops yesterday?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/02/23/venezuelan-soldiers-defect-troops-fire-tear-gas-protesters-colombia/amp/
ren hoek
Footballguy
https://twitter.com/federation/status/1099374815394308102?s=21
We’ve learned that there are some people not affiliated w/ @cruzrojacol & @CruzRojaVe wearing Red Cross emblems at Colombia-#Venezuela & Brazil-Ven border.
We urge them to stop doing this. They might mean well but they risk jeopardizing our neutrality, impartiality & independence
We’ve learned that there are some people not affiliated w/ @cruzrojacol & @CruzRojaVe wearing Red Cross emblems at Colombia-#Venezuela & Brazil-Ven border.
We urge them to stop doing this. They might mean well but they risk jeopardizing our neutrality, impartiality & independence
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I’ll say this about Ren’s point. I really don’t agree with the border closings or the halting of aid or commerce, and I don’t think it’s just US aid, but what I do think is possible is provoking some kind of incident by trying to force the aid through. It could be say a massacre, or firing on a ship or plane or convoy, that could be a trigger to provoke Trump into taking some kind of military action. Obviously no one rational or decent wants to see that.
ren hoek
Footballguy
But you do see why they'd be skeptical of "aid", right?
China, Russia, the Red Cross, and the UN have been administering aid for a while now. They are not closed off to aid. They are closed off to "aid" from governments whose clear objective is to overthrow them.
Other than that, I agree it's a perilous situation with chances of triggering a serous proxy war. The US-aligned axis and rightwing opposition are pouring gasoline on it.
Last edited by a moderator:
ren hoek
Footballguy
https://twitter.com/MaxBlumenthal/status/1098347192207720449
Richard Branson’s Live Aid interventionist propaganda show has brought the reality of Venezuela’s “humanitarian crisis” into the open: A local bus line is offering affluent Venezuelan opposition supporters luxury vacation packages to “the most trendy concert of the decade”
Richard Branson’s Live Aid interventionist propaganda show has brought the reality of Venezuela’s “humanitarian crisis” into the open: A local bus line is offering affluent Venezuelan opposition supporters luxury vacation packages to “the most trendy concert of the decade”
ren hoek
Footballguy
In fact, Guaidó is from one of the most hard-line political parties among the opposition. While some parties have sought to displace chavismo through an electoral route, Leopoldo López, one of the founders of Voluntad Popular, led protests in 2014—many of which became violent—demanding Maduro’s exit. After Maduro’s first election, in 2013, López justified undemocratic approaches to removing him by declaring his government illegitimate. One of the few things we do know about Guaidó is that López has been one of his political mentors; some have even suggested López is continuing to call the shots while still under house arrest in suburban Caracas.
More than anything else, Guaidó appears to be a product of the right-wing, middle-class student movement that developed in opposition to the Chávez government in the mid-to-late 2000s. This movement, which took to the streets of Caracas to demand the ouster of Chávez, received much of its funding and training from Washington.
The following reporting is based on Tim Gill’s extensive research on US foreign policy toward Venezuela under Chávez, and the ways in which Washington sought to“promote democracy.” Gill conducted interviews with numerous US state actors and members Venezuelan civil society.
Over the course of several years, Washington worked with middle-class, opposition-aligned students through the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and its Office for Transition Initiatives (OTI). Indeed, OTI often works in war-torn countries that are, as the office’s name indicates, experiencing a “political transition,” such as Burma, Iraq, and Libya. When Gill asked a former high-ranking USAID member why OTI worked in Venezuela, he stated that OTI are “the special forces of the democracy assistance community.” Another USAID functionary told Gill that OTI allowed the United States to provide funds to opposition members in Venezuela faster than if they used traditional channels.
What were the ultimate objectives of USAID/OTI in Venezuela during the years they worked with the student movement? US Ambassador to Venezuela William Brownfield specifically laid them out in a secret embassy cable secured by Chelsea Manning and released by WikiLeaks: “1) Strengthening Democratic Institutions, 2) Penetrating Chavez’ Political Base, 3) Dividing Chavismo, 4) Protecting Vital US business, and 5) Isolating Chavez internationally.”
These efforts initially focused on setting up community groups in working-class neighborhoods, which appeared neutral but were actually operated by opposition activists. Since USAID/OTI could not directly fund political parties, they worked with party leaders, including those from Voluntad Popular, to help opposition activists set up these community groups in neighborhoods where chavistas were predominant. The groups, which claimed to promote and provide training related to participatory democracy, ultimately aimed to put opposition activists in contact with Chávez supporters in an effort to generate chavista support for their political parties. One USAID/OTI contractor who helped to organize these groups in Venezuela explained to Gill:
We even developed new NGOs that were looking very neutral in the eyes of the government; by them we can help people in the poor neighborhoods. They looked neutral because they had no affiliation with no political party. They were people from the neighborhood, even though they were opposition. They create the organizations with no past relation to political parties. So when they worked in the barrios, they looked very neutral. So we gave them money, but they succeeded in helping democratic values. They were pulling people away from Chávez in a subtle manner. We were telling them what democracy is, and showing them what democracy means. We developed very nice materials and took care of every word to give them, so it didn’t look like we were sympathizing with the opposition.
The campaign didn’t work out as planned. Chávez continued to garner support among the popular classes, and many barrio inhabitants eventually caught on that the community groups were organized by the opposition, so most stopped attending.
Thereafter, USAID/OTI largely shifted its efforts toward the burgeoning student movement that developed in the mid-2000s—the movement in which Guaidó “cut his political teeth,” according to a report in The Guardian. A former USAID/OTI member who helped devise US efforts in Venezuela said the “objective was that you had thousands of youth, high school, and college kids…that were horrified of this Indian-looking guy in power. They were idealistic. We wanted to help them to build a civic organization, so that they could mobilize and organize. This is different than protesting.” In other words, USAID/OTI sought to take advantage of racialized fear of Chávez to organize middle-class youth around a long-term strategy to defeat him.
How exactly did the United States help these students? One USAID/OTI contractor who worked directly with them on a routine basis revealed to Gill that Washington provided funding and training to the student groups that developed at the same time Guaidó was part of them. This contractor said that for USAID/OTI, the most successful time was during 2007, when the student movement developed.… The US had a very daring movement and brought a lot of money to the students through OTI, and it grew a lot as a result.… I can say with pride that a lot of people [now] in the Congress—I know them from our projects.… I’m proud. It’s like you see your son and daughter grow up. I knew them when they grew up…the potential leaders when/if there is a change of government, and we were the ones who showed them the first steps.
Washington gave money to these student groups for a number of purposes. As one USAID/OTI employee put it, the funding was for “all the things they needed: microphones, things for presentations, paper.” Another USAID/OTI employee described hosting seminars and courses with student protesters. One employee described the training this way: “what is democracy, what is the vote, all the pillars with the democracy system, to reinforce them, what language they have to use.” However, one USAID worker contended that Washington—albeit not through USAID—was also providing the students with items that could “be used in the street and protect themselves, [such as] masks, but it was not part of open grants.” Although they could not confirm the specific US origins of this assistance, this sort of aid has been used for CIA operations in the past.
While it is unclear what Guaidó’s role was in these groups at the time, it is clear that US “democracy promotion” financed his cohort’s formation and its demonstrations for over a decade. Two of the key actors that USAID/OTI contractors interacted with during this period were Yon Goicoechea and Freddy Guevara, who like Guaidó were from Voluntad Popular. All three have been widely documented in the media as leading student protests against the Chávez government at the same time, putting them in the same organizational circles.
This is not to suggest that Guaidó, Goicoechea, or any other opposition member is merely a puppet of the United States. But it is clear that Guaidó and others in his circle share a worldview and certain goals with the US government. Many of them linked up with US agencies, which provided them with the resources needed to amplify their voices and reach a much larger audience. When Gill asked one USAID/OTI member whether the goal was “to get Chávez out of office,” the member responded, “That was the idea.”
How Washington Funded the Counterrevolution in Venezuela
More than anything else, Guaidó appears to be a product of the right-wing, middle-class student movement that developed in opposition to the Chávez government in the mid-to-late 2000s. This movement, which took to the streets of Caracas to demand the ouster of Chávez, received much of its funding and training from Washington.
The following reporting is based on Tim Gill’s extensive research on US foreign policy toward Venezuela under Chávez, and the ways in which Washington sought to“promote democracy.” Gill conducted interviews with numerous US state actors and members Venezuelan civil society.
Over the course of several years, Washington worked with middle-class, opposition-aligned students through the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and its Office for Transition Initiatives (OTI). Indeed, OTI often works in war-torn countries that are, as the office’s name indicates, experiencing a “political transition,” such as Burma, Iraq, and Libya. When Gill asked a former high-ranking USAID member why OTI worked in Venezuela, he stated that OTI are “the special forces of the democracy assistance community.” Another USAID functionary told Gill that OTI allowed the United States to provide funds to opposition members in Venezuela faster than if they used traditional channels.
What were the ultimate objectives of USAID/OTI in Venezuela during the years they worked with the student movement? US Ambassador to Venezuela William Brownfield specifically laid them out in a secret embassy cable secured by Chelsea Manning and released by WikiLeaks: “1) Strengthening Democratic Institutions, 2) Penetrating Chavez’ Political Base, 3) Dividing Chavismo, 4) Protecting Vital US business, and 5) Isolating Chavez internationally.”
These efforts initially focused on setting up community groups in working-class neighborhoods, which appeared neutral but were actually operated by opposition activists. Since USAID/OTI could not directly fund political parties, they worked with party leaders, including those from Voluntad Popular, to help opposition activists set up these community groups in neighborhoods where chavistas were predominant. The groups, which claimed to promote and provide training related to participatory democracy, ultimately aimed to put opposition activists in contact with Chávez supporters in an effort to generate chavista support for their political parties. One USAID/OTI contractor who helped to organize these groups in Venezuela explained to Gill:
We even developed new NGOs that were looking very neutral in the eyes of the government; by them we can help people in the poor neighborhoods. They looked neutral because they had no affiliation with no political party. They were people from the neighborhood, even though they were opposition. They create the organizations with no past relation to political parties. So when they worked in the barrios, they looked very neutral. So we gave them money, but they succeeded in helping democratic values. They were pulling people away from Chávez in a subtle manner. We were telling them what democracy is, and showing them what democracy means. We developed very nice materials and took care of every word to give them, so it didn’t look like we were sympathizing with the opposition.
The campaign didn’t work out as planned. Chávez continued to garner support among the popular classes, and many barrio inhabitants eventually caught on that the community groups were organized by the opposition, so most stopped attending.
Thereafter, USAID/OTI largely shifted its efforts toward the burgeoning student movement that developed in the mid-2000s—the movement in which Guaidó “cut his political teeth,” according to a report in The Guardian. A former USAID/OTI member who helped devise US efforts in Venezuela said the “objective was that you had thousands of youth, high school, and college kids…that were horrified of this Indian-looking guy in power. They were idealistic. We wanted to help them to build a civic organization, so that they could mobilize and organize. This is different than protesting.” In other words, USAID/OTI sought to take advantage of racialized fear of Chávez to organize middle-class youth around a long-term strategy to defeat him.
How exactly did the United States help these students? One USAID/OTI contractor who worked directly with them on a routine basis revealed to Gill that Washington provided funding and training to the student groups that developed at the same time Guaidó was part of them. This contractor said that for USAID/OTI, the most successful time was during 2007, when the student movement developed.… The US had a very daring movement and brought a lot of money to the students through OTI, and it grew a lot as a result.… I can say with pride that a lot of people [now] in the Congress—I know them from our projects.… I’m proud. It’s like you see your son and daughter grow up. I knew them when they grew up…the potential leaders when/if there is a change of government, and we were the ones who showed them the first steps.
Washington gave money to these student groups for a number of purposes. As one USAID/OTI employee put it, the funding was for “all the things they needed: microphones, things for presentations, paper.” Another USAID/OTI employee described hosting seminars and courses with student protesters. One employee described the training this way: “what is democracy, what is the vote, all the pillars with the democracy system, to reinforce them, what language they have to use.” However, one USAID worker contended that Washington—albeit not through USAID—was also providing the students with items that could “be used in the street and protect themselves, [such as] masks, but it was not part of open grants.” Although they could not confirm the specific US origins of this assistance, this sort of aid has been used for CIA operations in the past.
While it is unclear what Guaidó’s role was in these groups at the time, it is clear that US “democracy promotion” financed his cohort’s formation and its demonstrations for over a decade. Two of the key actors that USAID/OTI contractors interacted with during this period were Yon Goicoechea and Freddy Guevara, who like Guaidó were from Voluntad Popular. All three have been widely documented in the media as leading student protests against the Chávez government at the same time, putting them in the same organizational circles.
This is not to suggest that Guaidó, Goicoechea, or any other opposition member is merely a puppet of the United States. But it is clear that Guaidó and others in his circle share a worldview and certain goals with the US government. Many of them linked up with US agencies, which provided them with the resources needed to amplify their voices and reach a much larger audience. When Gill asked one USAID/OTI member whether the goal was “to get Chávez out of office,” the member responded, “That was the idea.”
How Washington Funded the Counterrevolution in Venezuela
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
Big wall of words. Impressive.
I have not been following this story as closely as maybe I should - but it feels like the US is provoking conflict here - and I am not sure why.
I was listening to some reporters on the ground yesterday, and they were mentioning that the actual aid on the border is largely symbolic - i.e. it is just a small drop in the bucket of the aid actually needed. And, that the major goal of getting the aid to the border was to create the PR around Madura refusing aid. That strikes me as a very dangerous game to play with so many lives at stake in any kind of violent confrontation.
I was listening to some reporters on the ground yesterday, and they were mentioning that the actual aid on the border is largely symbolic - i.e. it is just a small drop in the bucket of the aid actually needed. And, that the major goal of getting the aid to the border was to create the PR around Madura refusing aid. That strikes me as a very dangerous game to play with so many lives at stake in any kind of violent confrontation.
ren hoek
Footballguy
A huge anti-government demonstration was supposed to make possible a coup d’état, a maneuver the CIA has used repeatedly—in Iran in 1953, Guatemala in 1954, Brazil in 1964 and many more, straight through to Honduras in 2009 and Ukraine in 2015. The turnout at the Trump administration’s demonstration was disappointing, and the coup d’état never occurred. The result is that Trump has expressed a sudden interest in getting food and medicine to Venezuelans (FAIR.org, 2/9/19).
Trump, who let thousands die in Puerto Rico and put small children in cages on the Mexican border, seems to be an unlikely champion of humanitarian aid to Latin Americans, but the corporate media have straight-facedly pretended to believe it.
Most have suppressed reports that the Red Cross and the UN are providing aid to Venezuela in cooperation with the Venezuelan government, and have protested against US “aid” that is obviously a political and military ploy.
The corporate media have continued to peddle the Trump-as-humanitarian-champion line, even after it was revealed that a US plane was caught smuggling weapons into Venezuela, and even after Trump named Iran/Contra criminal Elliott Abrams to head up Venezuelan operations. Abrams was in charge of the State Department Human Rights Office during the 1980s, when weapons to US-backed terrorists in Nicaragua were shipped in US planes disguised as “humanitarian” relief.
Canada’s CBC (2/15/19) at least had the honesty to acknowledge that it had been had in swallowing a lie from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that the Venezuelan government had blockaded a bridge between Colombia and Venezuela to prevent aid shipments. The newly built bridge has not yet been opened: it has never been open, apparently because of hostile relations between the two countries, but the non-opening long predates the US government’s alleged food and medicine shipments.
The absurdity of $20 million of US food and medicine aid to a country of 30 million, when US authorities have stolen $30 billion from Venezuela in oil revenue, and take $30 million every day, needs no comment.
Venezuela Coverage Takes Us Back to Golden Age of Lying About Latin America
Trump, who let thousands die in Puerto Rico and put small children in cages on the Mexican border, seems to be an unlikely champion of humanitarian aid to Latin Americans, but the corporate media have straight-facedly pretended to believe it.
Most have suppressed reports that the Red Cross and the UN are providing aid to Venezuela in cooperation with the Venezuelan government, and have protested against US “aid” that is obviously a political and military ploy.
The corporate media have continued to peddle the Trump-as-humanitarian-champion line, even after it was revealed that a US plane was caught smuggling weapons into Venezuela, and even after Trump named Iran/Contra criminal Elliott Abrams to head up Venezuelan operations. Abrams was in charge of the State Department Human Rights Office during the 1980s, when weapons to US-backed terrorists in Nicaragua were shipped in US planes disguised as “humanitarian” relief.
Canada’s CBC (2/15/19) at least had the honesty to acknowledge that it had been had in swallowing a lie from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that the Venezuelan government had blockaded a bridge between Colombia and Venezuela to prevent aid shipments. The newly built bridge has not yet been opened: it has never been open, apparently because of hostile relations between the two countries, but the non-opening long predates the US government’s alleged food and medicine shipments.
The absurdity of $20 million of US food and medicine aid to a country of 30 million, when US authorities have stolen $30 billion from Venezuela in oil revenue, and take $30 million every day, needs no comment.
Venezuela Coverage Takes Us Back to Golden Age of Lying About Latin America
ren hoek
Footballguy
I keep thinking back on this. The problem isn't that Trump doesn't have the diplomatic stature to overthrow Maduro. The problem is that it's a proven, time-tested, disastrous policy that will bring all sorts of death, destruction and carnage to Venezuela.
jonessed
Footballguy
It’s a failed state and has no path to recovery. It could certainly get worse, but international support will go a long way towards opening up their economy again and giving them access to much needed funding.
I think it’s hard odds that the status quo is the best path forward.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
We've talked about diplomacy before. To me that means a way of institutionally certifying nations' positions on policy to effect certain goals hopefully in both/all nations' interests. The problem with the Trump administration is that it functions in a way that is antithetical to that, it's against US and western, or first world, tradition. So for instance, we do have diplomats and people in State and DOD even who follow traditional institutional ways of asking and demanding things. And we have people who want to help aid the VZ people and promote democracy in a peaceful way. However, in the Trump administration, we are on our 2nd SOS, our 3rd NSA, our 2nd UN Ambassador, our 2nd CIA Director, and a myriad of leadership positions have never been filled. Ambassadors have quit. We don't have Mattis, McMaster and Kelly anymore, we have Shanahan, Bolton and Mulvaney now. Confusion and policy by whim and contradictory positions are more akin to third world autocratic nations. While our policy per se in VZ has indeed been traditional in some ways (as even Trump critics have stated), we have Trump with his bombastic statements and Bolton with his history (and his likely purposeful exposed note re 5K troops), and the appointment of Elliott. Trump will get up before the UN and in one speech talk about the absoluteness of national sovereignty and in the same talk about regime change in Venezuela. While he talks about the evils of Iran and VZ he genuflects to the likes of KJU and Putin. And in general of course his administration is an actual LOL joke among foreign governments, friendly and unfriendly. The WH miscommunicates also which leads to risk of conflict. Honestly I just hope we make it through these next 2 years and that what are the better goals - aid, peaceful transition to democracy - are effected here. Obviously Trump is more of an obstacle to be overcome here, but then again his fecklessness means his ability to do things can also be limited. Otoh he's easily manipulable, both from inside his administration and also by our adversaries. We just have to hope for the best. As a matter of principle I think that Venezuelans need aid and we should give it to them, the key is to not risk conflict as part of that.
Last edited by a moderator:
ren hoek
Footballguy
It's not a conspiracy. It matches almost verbatim what Trump and John Bolton have said about Venezuela. Unlike the fake news you read, they really couldn't spell it out any harder for you.
What Bolton said doesn't match the description of that random twitter person or you. The oil industry in Venezuela will be integral to reversing their economic disaster.
This isn't a US inspired coup and the US did not cause this crisis in Venezuela. Israel isn't a "gangster terrorist state". You really are about the last person that should criticize news sources when you link to people like that.
ren hoek
Footballguy
The status quo is what they've been doing for years. It's the same story over and over again. Sanctions into economic asphyxiation, diplomatic isolation, CIA coups, arming the opposition, fomenting regime change. That is the status quo. The only thing that ever seems to change is the bogus rationale for overthrowing the regime. Weird how this regime change argument never seems to come up with Saudi Arabia, as MBS beheads political dissidents and massacres Yemen.
If the 'international community' cared about the wellbeing of Venezuelans, it would end the sanctions, return gold to the Venezuelan treasury, and stop arming/supporting a violent opposition party. They'd also respect the wishes of Red Cross/UN, and stop politicizing humanitarian aid.
ren hoek
Footballguy
You think that John Bolton is talking about Venezuelan oil and American oil interests out of humanitarian concern for Venezuelans?
It IS a US inspired coup. The opposition represented by Guaido has had financial, strategic and material backing from the US for over a decade. Guaido, whose mentors include Leopoldo Lopez and others with strong ties to USAID and NED, has associations with US 'pro-democracy' outfits dating back to his education at George Washington University in DC long before Venezuela's student protests. That's the party the US has backed and it's the party that Trump just crowned interim president. Guaido supporters are supporting Trump on this, period.
This is simply propaganda from Maduro. In reality, he is an illegitimate, authoritarian that murders opposition and has left Venezuela in economic/humanitarian chaos. Trump is right to support Guaido and Venezuelans deserve democracy, but the US didn't cause this.
The US isn't making over 3 million people flee Venezuela. It isn't making their economy less than half the size it was 5 years ago. Nor any of these variety of terrible facts: https://www.ft.com/content/0228db48-6e4b-11e7-bfeb-33fe0c5b7eaa
ren hoek
Footballguy
https://twitter.com/timothys/status/1099788654988398593?s=21
Rubio making straightup death threats against Maduro. These are the “humanitarians” bringing “democracy” to Venezuela.
Rubio making straightup death threats against Maduro. These are the “humanitarians” bringing “democracy” to Venezuela.
ren hoek
Footballguy
More Russian/Maduro propaganda, this time from Iraq/Afghan war veteran, brother of Pat Tillman, Kevin Tillman. //
Why this coup is taking place is transparent. Some of our government officials are actually telling us. Our leaders, yet again, feel entitled to another country’s resources. As was the case in Iraq, Venezuela’s oil reserves are not controlled by U.S. corporations or a pliant government. They are owned by the people of Venezuela. It is theirs and nobody else’s. This means the oil cannot be looted by Western corporations or controlled for political purposes by outside forces.
Unless, of course, a coup takes place and the oil is taken by force. That is what it appears our leaders are going to do. In all fairness to members of the Trump administration, this belligerence toward Venezuela did not start with them. It is merely an extension of previous administrations’ policies. If Venezuelans believe Maduro has mismanaged their nation’s most valuable asset, it is their right to seek change, but this is not a right enjoyed by Donald Trump, Nancy Pelosi or Elliott Abrams.
Like Iraq, our interference is not about liberating the Venezuelan people from some tyrannical regime. Nor is it about saving them from starvation. So please don’t allow our leaders to use the goodness inside of you as a weapon for your own manipulation. The goal is to pillage and plunder a vulnerable nation. It is evident that our representative leaders don’t care about the health and welfare of the Venezuelan people any more than they cared about the Iraqi people.
If they cared, they would consult with the Venezuelan government and ask how the U.S. might provide unconditional assistance. If they cared, they would let Venezuelans sort out their own problems democratically. If they cared about democracy, sovereignty, individual rights, human rights and the rule of law, then they would keep their hands off of Venezuela.
Tomorrow is a critical day for Venezuela. The U.S. and the coup leaders plan to illegally bring $30 million worth of “aid” into Venezuela, which has been explicitly rejected by the Venezuelan government. The aid is being refused because the Venezuelan government understands that its humanitarian crisis is in part being caused by the same nation offering aid in bad faith. What makes the offer a sick joke is that Venezuela is estimated to be losing $30 million a day in oil revenue. This fraudulent olive branch is so transparently a political weapon that even the Red Cross and the United Nations are crying foul.
No matter how ridiculous the coordinated event sounds, history has shown that these gambits for power can and do work. The Trump administration and Venezuelan coup leaders are hoping for a spark, a catalyst, a skirmish to justify a U.S. invasion—anything that will create just enough chaos to open up this window of opportunity. It is reminiscent of the U.S. propaganda surrounding Saddam and weapons inspectors. It is meant to be an inciting event.
A Call to Halt an Illegal Invasion of Venezuela
Why this coup is taking place is transparent. Some of our government officials are actually telling us. Our leaders, yet again, feel entitled to another country’s resources. As was the case in Iraq, Venezuela’s oil reserves are not controlled by U.S. corporations or a pliant government. They are owned by the people of Venezuela. It is theirs and nobody else’s. This means the oil cannot be looted by Western corporations or controlled for political purposes by outside forces.
Unless, of course, a coup takes place and the oil is taken by force. That is what it appears our leaders are going to do. In all fairness to members of the Trump administration, this belligerence toward Venezuela did not start with them. It is merely an extension of previous administrations’ policies. If Venezuelans believe Maduro has mismanaged their nation’s most valuable asset, it is their right to seek change, but this is not a right enjoyed by Donald Trump, Nancy Pelosi or Elliott Abrams.
Like Iraq, our interference is not about liberating the Venezuelan people from some tyrannical regime. Nor is it about saving them from starvation. So please don’t allow our leaders to use the goodness inside of you as a weapon for your own manipulation. The goal is to pillage and plunder a vulnerable nation. It is evident that our representative leaders don’t care about the health and welfare of the Venezuelan people any more than they cared about the Iraqi people.
If they cared, they would consult with the Venezuelan government and ask how the U.S. might provide unconditional assistance. If they cared, they would let Venezuelans sort out their own problems democratically. If they cared about democracy, sovereignty, individual rights, human rights and the rule of law, then they would keep their hands off of Venezuela.
Tomorrow is a critical day for Venezuela. The U.S. and the coup leaders plan to illegally bring $30 million worth of “aid” into Venezuela, which has been explicitly rejected by the Venezuelan government. The aid is being refused because the Venezuelan government understands that its humanitarian crisis is in part being caused by the same nation offering aid in bad faith. What makes the offer a sick joke is that Venezuela is estimated to be losing $30 million a day in oil revenue. This fraudulent olive branch is so transparently a political weapon that even the Red Cross and the United Nations are crying foul.
No matter how ridiculous the coordinated event sounds, history has shown that these gambits for power can and do work. The Trump administration and Venezuelan coup leaders are hoping for a spark, a catalyst, a skirmish to justify a U.S. invasion—anything that will create just enough chaos to open up this window of opportunity. It is reminiscent of the U.S. propaganda surrounding Saddam and weapons inspectors. It is meant to be an inciting event.
A Call to Halt an Illegal Invasion of Venezuela
timschochet
Footballguy
Some astonishing facts I’ve been reading about this:
1. When Hugo Chavez took power, oil production was at 3.5 million barrels a day. Today it’s at 1 million barrels a day. This has nothing to do with world supply and demand- it’s all a result of internal politics.
2. The monetary situation is similar to Germany in the 1920s- the government keeps printing money and its completely worthless. You need a wheelbarrow full of bills to buy a gallon of milk.
3. Over 9 million Venezuelans eat 1 meal a day or less.
1. When Hugo Chavez took power, oil production was at 3.5 million barrels a day. Today it’s at 1 million barrels a day. This has nothing to do with world supply and demand- it’s all a result of internal politics.
2. The monetary situation is similar to Germany in the 1920s- the government keeps printing money and its completely worthless. You need a wheelbarrow full of bills to buy a gallon of milk.
3. Over 9 million Venezuelans eat 1 meal a day or less.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
The Z Machine
Footballguy
1) PDVSA had been run into the ground due to cronyism and the installation of managers that have no idea what they're doing. Furthermore, as a state owned enterprise, the rank and file workers were compelled to show support for PSUV, Chávez's party. If they didn't show up to counter protests wearing the PSUV red, they were fired. Finally, as the economy began tanking, many of the skilled workers that had technical training fled to locations where they could get paid for their skills instead of seeing their purchasing power go to zero. This has happened in many segments of the profesional occupations. Those that could leave have done so.
2) The economic situation there is worse than in the Weimar Republic in the 1930s. All commerce is executed in digital bank to bank transfers, so the effect is less pronounced than in other economic collapses. Although really, the only people that can buy things without waiting in 4 hour lines are those with access to hard currency, like USD or Colombian peso.
One thing I don't see reported much in English language media about Venezuela is that the military officers, certainly high ranking ones, are enriching themselves with narcotrafficing across the borders. They control the borders, so they are taking cuts for moving drugs from Colombia, Bolivia, Peru, Brazil into Mexico and the Caribbean, where they make their way further north to the US. This might be diminished lately due to the flight of internal migrants to the borders, but for a decade under Chávez and Maduro, that was one means for keeping the military on the side of PSUV.
timschochet
Footballguy
Thanks for explaining.
it certainly seems like an unsustainable situation. The main question for us is what our level of involvement should be. Important to remember history: Fidel Castro’s regime was on the brink of collapse when we saved it inadvertently with the Bay of Pigs- we unified the country against “Yanqui Imperialism”. We need to be careful to avoid that here.
Authoritarian leader seeks closer ties to Russia which has lent his government billions. Hmmmm
To me point one is why it’s economy has collapsed. Ever since oil production was taken over and all the oil companies kick out, production has suffer. This was partially preventable.
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, you also have the collapse in oil prices about 5 years ago to go along with the general resource mismanagement and rampant corruption....
That’s why I put partially preventable. They can’t control oil prices but mismanagement and corruption are directly linked to the state taking over oil companies.
Yeah. Z's post above partially touches on things like the 2003 strike and its impacts. Generating a recovery in Venezuela necessarily is going to mean making their oil industry more productive, as I mentioned last week. It seems like Maduro is trying to do that with Russian help, but it will just be the same or worse corruption...
Last edited by a moderator:
Most people in Latin America agree that the USA should not get involved militarily. Some Cubans and Venezuelans in Miami want Trump to invade, but when Trump came to Miami last week, many Venezuelans living here protested against US untervention for the reason Tim mentioned.
The Panama invasion under Bush 1 is not quite the same as there is no Panama Canal and not 35,000 Americans living in Venezuela and no US military there. The death of Lieutenant Paz was the match that kindled the invasion.
The Z Machine
Footballguy
The US should not get involved militarily, not even if there's a civil war. They need to convince other nations to stay out too and work through multinational coalitions to prevent violence and give humanitarian aid.
