| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Rump Ranger" |
| Date: |
10 Feb 2005 06:38:09 PM |
| Object: |
Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
OK, so I'm browsing through my copy of US News and World Report and
come up to the columnists (most neo-con trash, like John Leo and
Michael Barone) and I come upon Mort Zuckerman's column. Looks like
Iraq, the Palestinians, Syrians, and the Iranians isn't enough of a
target for this warhawk. Now he wants us to perhaps go to war with
Venezuela just because Chavez "threatens democracy", whatever that
means. When will these warhawks learn that if certain countries get
democratic governments (like our allies Saudi Arabia and Egypt),
they're likely to be anti-American? The will of the people in
Venezuela is to be against American policy abroad (who can blame them).
So now what's so bad about Chavez? According to Zuckerman, he's doing
the following things:
"Just for starters, Chavez has rewritten Venezuela's Constitution to
enhance his powers"
You mean like Bush has enhanced his power with the PATRIOT and Homeland
Security Acts?
"purged critics in the military"
Either Zuckerman is a liar or he's woefully ignorant of how the
military *works.* *Nobody* in the military can publicly criticize the
President of the US according to the UCMJ. It's called *chain of
command*, which is something this warhawk either doesn't know or
purposely distorts. How much you wanna bet he never served in the
military?
"set up legislation to pack the Supreme Court"
You mean like how the US President appoints federal judges, right?
"intimidated the media by threatening the expropriation of the licenses
of private television stations that supported the opposition"
Like the FCC monitors American TV and licenses out bandwidth to radio
and TV stations?
"and given succor to thousands of Castro's military and intelligence
officers, along with many social and medical workers, while tens of
thousands of young Venezuelans have been sent to Cuba for
indoctrination."
There it is. He's a bad guy because he likes Castro, that boogyman one
would think was getting ready to invade and take over our country based
on American policy towards that country. Castro is not a good guy, but
*so what* if Chavez makes aliances to him and Venezualans want to go to
Cuba? It's *their* country, right? Is he arguing that Venezuela is
not free because he allows it's people to go to Cuba? And the US is
because they highly restrict it's own people from doing so? Orwellian
garbage, I tell you.
He also wrote a draconian law like this:
"Any individual who creates panic in the community or makes it restless
by disseminating false information via print media, radio, TV, phone,
electronic mail, or pamphlets will be punished with two to five years
in prison."
Tell me folks, how is this so "draconian" as opposed to US law? Go
ahead and incite a riot here and see how you're treated once the
government catches you.
Seems like Zuckerman has a problem with Chavez because he opposes US
Imperialism. Who outside of this country (and a significant number of
Americans as well) *wouldn't* oppose the imperialist agenda of the
neo-cons:
http://www.newamericancentury.org/
The Bush White House has made their imperialistic agenda clear. Is it
any suprise that:
[quote] A distinguished international coalition, including former Czech
President Vaclav Havel, Sen. John McCain, and former Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright, wrote to Chavez expressing concern that his actions
are "a grave threat to democracy." [end quote]
When Venezuala is the 5th largest oil exporting country and provides
13% of our oil?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2549589.stm
If we do go to war with Venezuela, just remember folks. The war isn't
about "restoring democracy" (whatever that means) in that country.
It's about oil. And the fact that Chavez threatens the supply as
America becomes more and more dependant on foreign oil. Zuckerman's
article pasted below for context:
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/050214/opinion/14edit.htm
Editorial
By Mortimer B. Zuckerman
Cracking down on Caracas
While we have our eyes on the Middle East and the recent good news out
of there, a danger to democracy is brewing right here in our backyard.
Venezuela, long one of Latin America's strongest democracies, is now
under siege by its president, Hugo Chavez. Thanks to an ill-judged
intervention by former President Jimmy Carter, Chavez narrowly survived
a recall election and has now accelerated his subversion of Venezuela's
democracy by a scummy deal with Fidel Castro.
According to Miami's El Nuevo Herald, Chavez has granted Cuban judicial
and security forces extensive police powers within Venezuela. Cubans
are already running the intelligence services and indoctrinating and
training the military. They will effectively bypass what is left of
Venezuela's judicial system when they exercise new powers to
investigate, seize, detain, and interrogate Venezuelans and Cubans
living in Venezuela, with the right to extradite them to Cuba and try
them there. This threatens the safety of some 30,000 Cubans in
Venezuela.
All this is a culmination of Chavez's frontal attack on civil society,
reducing state institutions to mere shadows with only ceremonial
powers. Just for starters, Chavez has rewritten Venezuela's
Constitution to enhance his powers, purged critics in the military, set
up legislation to pack the Supreme Court, intimidated the media by
threatening the expropriation of the licenses of private television
stations that supported the opposition, and given succor to thousands
of Castro's military and intelligence officers, along with many social
and medical workers, while tens of thousands of young Venezuelans have
been sent to Cuba for indoctrination.
Spots and pans. havez, in turn, provides Castro with 80,000 barrels a
day of essential oil. Venezuela's rich flow of oil revenues has enabled
Chavez to buy the support of sectors of Venezuelan society and assert
himself as the leader of what he calls a "jihad" against American
imperialism. Chavez's sense of moral justice is manifest in his
alliance with the worst criminal organizations in Latin America,
especially the narcoterrorists in Colombia. Just recently, he denounced
Colombian authorities because they arrested a senior member of the
narcoterrorist Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) who had
been given sanctuary in Venezuela.
To get a sense of the degree to which Chavez is intimidating his
opponents and harassing dissidents, just read the language of a new
criminal law that he pushed through the legislature: "Any individual
who creates panic in the community or makes it restless by
disseminating false information via print media, radio, TV, phone,
electronic mail, or pamphlets will be punished with two to five years
in prison." Even the most popular form of political protest, banging
pots and pans, done in the presence of members of his government, now
carries with it up to a three-month jail sentence.
A distinguished international coalition, including former Czech
President Vaclav Havel, Sen. John McCain, and former Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright, wrote to Chavez expressing concern that his actions
are "a grave threat to democracy."
Alas, our own President Carter compromised the hopes of Venezuelans in
the recall election by prematurely endorsing the vote that Chavez did
not earn or deserve. Carter's people counted fewer than 1 percent of
the polling stations, which, instead of being selected at random, as
originally anticipated, were selected by Venezuelan officials. Even
then, only 76 of the previously agreed 192 ballot boxes were counted,
with either opposition witnesses or international observers present at
only 26 out of the 76 boxes reviewed. The Chavez-controlled National
Electoral Council (CNE) forbade access to the tallying centers, not
only to Carter's people but to the representatives of the opposition,
and even to the two members of the CNE who opposed Chavez. Two
professors from Harvard and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
issued a report concluding that there was at least a 99 percent chance
the election was a fraud. The audited sample (Carter's) was simply not
a random sample, the professors concluded. Various independent exit
polls showed that Chavez had lost the vote by 59 percent to 41 percent,
instead of Chavez's contention that he had won by that margin.
Jimmy Carter, in effect, provided a seal of approval for a left-wing
demagogue intent on destroying democracy in Venezuela even as he seeks
to extend his ideology to other parts of Latin America. Secretary of
State Condoleezza Rice was correct when she pointed out that Chavez is
a danger not just to Venezuela but to much of Latin America. Very soon,
we must translate those wise words into an effective policy.
.
|
|
| User: "Roedy Green" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
10 Feb 2005 07:56:57 PM |
|
|
On 10 Feb 2005 16:38:09 -0800, "Rump Ranger" <buttpirate@fadmail.com>
wrote or quoted :
Now he wants us to perhaps go to war with
Venezuela just because Chavez "threatens democracy", whatever that
means.
"threatens democracy" is a code phrase for "is sitting on OUR oil".
Notice how the main democracy threateners are Saudi Arabia, Iraq, UAE,
Kuwait, Iran, Venezuela, Russia, Libya, Mexico and China.
rank : Country : 2001 proved Oil reserves (billion barrels)
1. Saudi Arabia 261.7
2. Iraq 112.5
3. United Arab Emirates 97.8
4. Kuwait 96.5
5. Iran 89.7
6. Venezuela 76.9 <<<<<<<<
7. Russia 48.6
8. Libya 29.5
9. Mexico 28.3
10. China 24.0
Indonesia 10.4
Canada 10
Brazil 8.4
Myanmar 3.1
Syria 2.5
Cuba 1.0
Sudan 0.563
Albania 0.165
Serbia and Montenegro 0.078
Somalia 0.0
Rwanda 0.0
"Never in human history have such genocide and cruelty been witnessed.
Such a genocide was never seen in the time of the pharaohs nor
of Hitler nor of Mussolini."
~ Mehmet Elkatmi, head of Turkish parliament's human rights commission
on Bush's genocide in the Iraq war. 2004-11-28
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
See http://mindprod.com/iraq.html photos of Bush's war crimes
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jez" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
12 Feb 2005 09:40:23 AM |
|
|
Rump Ranger wrote:
OK, so I'm browsing through my copy of US News and World Report and
come up to the columnists (most neo-con trash, like John Leo and
Michael Barone) and I come upon Mort Zuckerman's column. Looks like
Iraq, the Palestinians, Syrians, and the Iranians isn't enough of a
target for this warhawk. Now he wants us to perhaps go to war with
Venezuela just because Chavez "threatens democracy", whatever that
means. When will these warhawks learn that if certain countries get
democratic governments (like our allies Saudi Arabia and Egypt),
they're likely to be anti-American? The will of the people in
Venezuela is to be against American policy abroad (who can blame them).
So now what's so bad about Chavez? According to Zuckerman, he's doing
the following things:
"Just for starters, Chavez has rewritten Venezuela's Constitution to
enhance his powers"
You mean like Bush has enhanced his power with the PATRIOT and Homeland
Security Acts?
"purged critics in the military"
But the worst is.......'The final stroke will come this year when
President Chavez switches to the Petro-Euro, or creates a Latin American
currency. '
From
http://207.44.245.159/article8015.htm
Remember Saddam changed from dealing in the Dollar to dealing in the
Euro before Iraq was invaded.
Probably WHY Iraq was invaded.
Iran is also talking of changing it's Petro-dollars to the Euro...
Ho hum.
Snippage.....
--
Jez
'Realism is seductive because once you have accepted the reasonable
notion that you should base your actions on reality, you are too often
led to accept, without much questioning, someone else's version of what
that reality is. It is a crucial act of independent thinking to be
skeptical of someone else's description of reality.'-
Howard Zinn
NFS Underground2, Americas Army And MOH-PA
.
|
|
|
| User: "Komin" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
12 Feb 2005 10:09:33 AM |
|
|
the reason Bush invade Iraq quickly was because the UN was going to
give Iraq a clean bill of health with no proof of WMD, that would have
meant Iraq was to be free of all restrictions , and free of all UN
embargos.
That was why Bush had to invade Iraq before the UN gave out the final
report that Iraq had no WMD .
Venezeual must buy Nuclear weapons .
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jez" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
12 Feb 2005 10:50:03 AM |
|
|
Komin wrote:
the reason Bush invade Iraq quickly was because the UN was going to
give Iraq a clean bill of health with no proof of WMD, that would have
meant Iraq was to be free of all restrictions , and free of all UN
embargos.
That was why Bush had to invade Iraq before the UN gave out the final
report that Iraq had no WMD .
Those were all just excuses, I still see the real reason as being the
change from the Dollar to the Euro.
Venezeual must buy Nuclear weapons .
--
Jez
'Realism is seductive because once you have accepted the reasonable
notion that you should base your actions on reality, you are too often
led to accept, without much questioning, someone else's version of what
that reality is. It is a crucial act of independent thinking to be
skeptical of someone else's description of reality.'-
Howard Zinn
NFS Underground2, Americas Army And MOH-PA
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rump Ranger" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
18 Feb 2005 11:02:56 AM |
|
|
Jez wrote:
Komin wrote:
the reason Bush invade Iraq quickly was because the UN was going to
give Iraq a clean bill of health with no proof of WMD, that would
have
meant Iraq was to be free of all restrictions , and free of all UN
embargos.
That was why Bush had to invade Iraq before the UN gave out the
final
report that Iraq had no WMD .
Those were all just excuses, I still see the real reason as being the
change from the Dollar to the Euro.
Entirely possible. If the entire world dumped the Dollar and went to
the Euro (a possibility now that the dollar's falling and the EU
matches us in GDP), we'd be fucked. It's only because the dollar
standard is the current world currency that other nations bear our huge
debt (and even then, it's usually done with the implied threat of
military force). If they called in our loans, our economy (and
perhap's the world's) would collapse.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Komin" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
12 Feb 2005 12:35:12 PM |
|
|
after the invasion of Iraq , other oil exporters are still able to
change to Euro payment s .
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jez" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
12 Feb 2005 12:46:41 PM |
|
|
Komin wrote:
after the invasion of Iraq , other oil exporters are still able to
change to Euro payment s .
We will see what happens to them when they do.
Any bets on the US invading them after the change ?
--
Jez
'Realism is seductive because once you have accepted the reasonable
notion that you should base your actions on reality, you are too often
led to accept, without much questioning, someone else's version of what
that reality is. It is a crucial act of independent thinking to be
skeptical of someone else's description of reality.'-
Howard Zinn
NFS Underground2, Americas Army And MOH-PA
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
12 Feb 2005 01:22:06 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 18:46:41 +0000, Jez
<iced_spear@NODAMNSPAMpipex.com> wrote:
Komin wrote:
after the invasion of Iraq , other oil exporters are still able to
change to Euro payment s .
We will see what happens to them when they do.
Any bets on the US invading them after the change ?
Isn't that why they organised the coup in Venezuela?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rump Ranger" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
18 Feb 2005 11:06:53 AM |
|
|
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 18:46:41 +0000, Jez
<iced_spear@NODAMNSPAMpipex.com> wrote:
Komin wrote:
after the invasion of Iraq , other oil exporters are still able to
change to Euro payment s .
We will see what happens to them when they do.
Any bets on the US invading them after the change ?
Isn't that why they organised the coup in Venezuela?
I thought they did that to "give them freedom" and "make the world safe
for democracy." Keep this up and you might end up in Gitmo.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Komin" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
12 Feb 2005 01:45:01 PM |
|
|
the US backed a coup ,
the Russian sent in 30 Mig 29 for Chavez .
5 for Cuba to train Venezuela fighter pilots .
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jez" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
12 Feb 2005 05:45:00 PM |
|
|
Komin wrote:
the US backed a coup ,
the Russian sent in 30 Mig 29 for Chavez .
5 for Cuba to train Venezuela fighter pilots .
Hmmm....... Cites ?
--
Jez
'Realism is seductive because once you have accepted the reasonable
notion that you should base your actions on reality, you are too often
led to accept, without much questioning, someone else's version of what
that reality is. It is a crucial act of independent thinking to be
skeptical of someone else's description of reality.'-
Howard Zinn
NFS Underground2, Americas Army And MOH-PA
.
|
|
|
| User: "Komin" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
12 Feb 2005 07:25:39 PM |
|
|
try this
http://www.vcrisis.com/print.php?content=letters/200501240801
I hope this is the correct one
.
|
|
|
| User: "Komin" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
12 Feb 2005 07:32:49 PM |
|
|
the one above is incorrect
try this new one below :
http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=25559
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jez" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
13 Feb 2005 08:44:40 AM |
|
|
Komin wrote:
the one above is incorrect
try this new one below :
http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=25559
Hmmm, interesting.
I find it strange that when Chinas oil investments in the Sudan started
showing results, we immediately started seeing reports about the vile
situation in Dafur.
What is strange is the the civil war in the Sudan has been going on for
some 20 years, with very little media interest, but as soon as China
benefits from Sudans Oil, we get calls to intervene in the area. Odd.
China in Sudan...
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=3&article_id=7398
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=china%27s+oil+investment+in+sudan&spell=1
--
Jez
'Realism is seductive because once you have accepted the reasonable
notion that you should base your actions on reality, you are too often
led to accept, without much questioning, someone else's version of what
that reality is. It is a crucial act of independent thinking to be
skeptical of someone else's description of reality.'-
Howard Zinn
NFS Underground2, Americas Army And MOH-PA
.
|
|
|
| User: "Komin" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
13 Feb 2005 09:03:43 AM |
|
|
Here is the US pattern for foreign intervention.all for oil .
First the US chooses a normal corrupted leader of an oil country , then
the US sells weapons to this corrupted leader dictator , then this
dcitator will be condamed by the US for his cruelty to his own
population ,having got arms from America , then American government
will call for the toppling of this leader dictator who got into power
with the American help in the first place .
Then American government can justify to this world community for
calling for the removal of this dictator who is an American creation .
So the US military can invade this dictator' s country to liberate the
population and to guard the Oil wealth for American companies.
this is usually the American way .
Now after Iraq , the next might be Iran ,
After Iran , it will be Uzbekistan .
The US government is feeding the leader of Uzbekistan with lots of
money , so to encourage him to move to his extreme dictator behaviour ,
in order for the US government to condame this Uzbek Dictator later on
,
so that , American military can invade Uzbekistan in the future, so to
save and liberate the Uzbek population from this Uzbek dictator , and
at the same time to guard the oil and gaz fields for the US oil groups
inside Uzbekistan .
This is the tactic of the American government uses to make regime
change .
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rump Ranger" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
18 Feb 2005 11:29:30 AM |
|
|
Komin wrote:
Here is the US pattern for foreign intervention.all for oil .
First the US chooses a normal corrupted leader of an oil country ,
then
the US sells weapons to this corrupted leader dictator , then this
dcitator will be condamed by the US for his cruelty to his own
population ,having got arms from America , then American government
will call for the toppling of this leader dictator who got into power
with the American help in the first place .
Not necessarily. Take Indonesia, for example. The US Government,
without even consulting the public, backed Suharto's coup during the
mid-50's because the politics of that country at the time was a little
too "leftist" for Washington's comfort (I guess the idea of social
reform which helps the poor is a bad thing when US oil interests are
involved). Anyhow, Suharto's military junta takes over and kills
hundreds of thousands of Indonesians and we don't even say anything.
During the 70's, Indonesia decides to put down unrest in East Timor.
Not only did Kissinger agree to this, he never even condemned it when
over 200,000 East Timorese were slaughtered in weeks by the Indonesian
military. We continued to support Suharto (one of the worst war
criminals ever) until the late 90's when a US ally which mattered more
to "our interests" started making noise about East Timor's oppression
by Suharto: Australia. Our government never gave a ***** about
Indonesian citizens or East Timorese. But they did care about
Australia because, quite frankly, we stand more to lose if we took
Indonesia over Australia. So the US uses another arm of hegemony: the
International Monetary Fund imposing restrictions and withdraws
military aid. Suharto's regime collapses. Which underscored the
point: We had *implicit* power to stop Suharto's massacres at any time
without even having to even fight a war there.
Then American government can justify to this world community for
calling for the removal of this dictator who is an American creation
..
So the US military can invade this dictator' s country to liberate
the
population and to guard the Oil wealth for American companies.
this is usually the American way .
Now after Iraq , the next might be Iran ,
After Iran , it will be Uzbekistan .
Maybe not. Uzbekistan is currently in the Bush regime's pocket and
their leader is *not* popular. In fact, if democracy did come to
Uzbekistan, chances are it would be pretty anti-American, and who could
blame them with "our" (read: BushCo's) blatant support for a horrible
dictator?
The US government is feeding the leader of Uzbekistan with lots of
money , so to encourage him to move to his extreme dictator behaviour
,
in order for the US government to condame this Uzbek Dictator later
on
,
so that , American military can invade Uzbekistan in the future, so
to
save and liberate the Uzbek population from this Uzbek dictator , and
at the same time to guard the oil and gaz fields for the US oil
groups
inside Uzbekistan .
Democracy in Uzbekistan or even getting rid of their current regime is
not in the USG's interests. It's OK for them unless a coup takes Islam
Karimov out and his successor's don't obey the American overlords.
This is the tactic of the American government uses to make regime
change .
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jez" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
13 Feb 2005 09:31:06 AM |
|
|
Komin wrote:
Here is the US pattern for foreign intervention.all for oil .
First the US chooses a normal corrupted leader of an oil country , then
the US sells weapons to this corrupted leader dictator , then this
dcitator will be condamed by the US for his cruelty to his own
population ,having got arms from America , then American government
will call for the toppling of this leader dictator who got into power
with the American help in the first place .
Then American government can justify to this world community for
calling for the removal of this dictator who is an American creation .
So the US military can invade this dictator' s country to liberate the
population and to guard the Oil wealth for American companies.
this is usually the American way .
Now after Iraq , the next might be Iran ,
After Iran , it will be Uzbekistan .
The US government is feeding the leader of Uzbekistan with lots of
money , so to encourage him to move to his extreme dictator behaviour ,
in order for the US government to condame this Uzbek Dictator later on
,
so that , American military can invade Uzbekistan in the future, so to
save and liberate the Uzbek population from this Uzbek dictator , and
at the same time to guard the oil and gaz fields for the US oil groups
inside Uzbekistan .
This is the tactic of the American government uses to make regime
change .
Hehe ! You seem to understand the situation very well !!!
--
Jez
'Realism is seductive because once you have accepted the reasonable
notion that you should base your actions on reality, you are too often
led to accept, without much questioning, someone else's version of what
that reality is. It is a crucial act of independent thinking to be
skeptical of someone else's description of reality.'-
Howard Zinn
NFS Underground2, Americas Army And MOH-PA
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rump Ranger" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
18 Feb 2005 11:12:31 AM |
|
|
Jez wrote:
Komin wrote:
the one above is incorrect
try this new one below :
http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=25559
Hmmm, interesting.
I find it strange that when Chinas oil investments in the Sudan
started
showing results, we immediately started seeing reports about the vile
situation in Dafur.
What is strange is the the civil war in the Sudan has been going on
for
some 20 years, with very little media interest, but as soon as China
benefits from Sudans Oil, we get calls to intervene in the area. Odd.
Not at all. America is bent on controlling the world's oil supply
through military bases. As soon as they see one of their "strategic
competitors" like China profitting from an oil source they don't
control, we soon find a "humanitarian" reason to interact militarily.
Which is why war rhetoric is going up a notch with Iran, who's selling
oil to China as well. Remember: Saddam Hussein was a "good guy"
according to these guys in BushCo until he invaded Kuwait and
threatened Saudi Arabia. All the sudden the prospect of most of the
world's oil supply being in one guy's hands was bad for "regional
stability", so we went to war.
Same tune, different players.
China in Sudan...
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=3&article_id=7398
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=china%27s+oil+investment+in+sudan&spell=1
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Komin" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
12 Feb 2005 12:57:00 PM |
|
|
Too late , many oil exporting nations are afraid of the US dollars .
the US will not invade any more oil exporting nations , this is too
costly .
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rump Ranger" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
18 Feb 2005 11:05:40 AM |
|
|
Komin wrote:
Too late , many oil exporting nations are afraid of the US dollars .
the US will not invade any more oil exporting nations , this is too
costly .
You're making one huge mistake in your reasoning: thinking that the
Bush Administration is actually acting on reality instead of their
ideology. Make no mistake, these assholes will stop at nothing short
of world domination, even if it means destroying our country
(literally) in the process. September 11 was just the first of the
"blowback" we're bound to get in the decades to come.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Komin" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
12 Feb 2005 01:10:34 PM |
|
|
the US is looking more to the west African nations for oil .
why attack Venezuela when Americans can get more oil from gabon,
equatorial Guineas, Angola .
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Komin" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
12 Feb 2005 01:13:04 PM |
|
|
the US is looking more to the west African nations for oil .
why attack Venezuela when Americans can get more oil from gabon,
equatorial Guineas, Angola .
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jez" |
|
| Title: Re: Is a war in Venezuela needed? |
12 Feb 2005 05:47:45 PM |
|
|
Komin wrote:
the US is looking more to the west African nations for oil .
why attack Venezuela when Americans can get more oil from gabon,
equatorial Guineas, Angola .
Look into Chinese oil investments in the Sudan.
--
Jez
'Realism is seductive because once you have accepted the reasonable
notion that you should base your actions on reality, you are too often
led to accept, without much questioning, someone else's version of what
that reality is. It is a crucial act of independent thinking to be
skeptical of someone else's description of reality.'-
Howard Zinn
NFS Underground2, Americas Army And MOH-PA
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
