|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
 Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:05 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| ChuckECheese wrote: |
[
Handouts to the US? All Chavez is doing is starving his own people where more than half of his population is under poverty line. Let him go around and offer free and discounted oil to the US and other countries while his people are starving.
. |
Actually, the evidence is that the standard of living and quality of life for the poor of Venezuala has risen considerably under Chavez. And they keep voting him in time and again. It's their business, not yours. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
For the morons out there:
You want to see everything as black and white, good guy/bad guy. Well the world's not like that. People come in many shades of grey. To you, finding faults with Chavez proves his is as black as black, and you can therefore ignore any of the good he's done for the country, and the wishes of the majority of the populace. Any leader before him has been an arsehole, so what if he is too? But you're pissed off because this arsehole is not YOUR arsehole, bought and sold by you. The US government would happily have an arsehole in this arsehole's place - an arsehole who feathered his own nest, that of the Venezualen elite, and that of international big business. This arsehole chooses to improve the lot of the poor majority.
I know which arsehole I would choose if I was a poor Venezualen. It's called democracy. Get over it. Worry about your own leaders (who are a far greater danger to the world) and let those people do what they want. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
For the morons out there:
You want to see everything as black and white, good guy/bad guy. |
Is this irony or what? Because I haven't seen anything from you more complicated than "America bad." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thunndarr wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
For the morons out there:
You want to see everything as black and white, good guy/bad guy. |
Is this irony or what? Because I haven't seen anything from you more complicated than "America bad." |
Because that's all your poor little mind is capable of inferring. Any detail, complexity or humour is lost on you. Stick to Sesame Street in future.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Thunndarr wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
For the morons out there:
You want to see everything as black and white, good guy/bad guy. |
Is this irony or what? Because I haven't seen anything from you more complicated than "America bad." |
Because that's all your poor little mind is capable of inferring. Any detail, complexity or humour is lost on you. Stick to Sesame Street in future. |
At least my "poor little mind" is capable enough to come up with more insults than "simian" or "poor little mind." But yes, you've clearly proven your intellectual superiority here. I certainly hope that someday I can equal your verbal prowess. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thunndarr wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
For the morons out there:
You want to see everything as black and white, good guy/bad guy. |
Is this irony or what? Because I haven't seen anything from you more complicated than "America bad." |
indeed.
Big Bird, where oh where did I defend the US on this thread? Where did I say the US had not interfered with elections in other countries? And how can YOU criticize the United States for doing such actions while looking the other way when Chavez does it? Can you say HYPOCRITE? I think I can.
Chavez hasn't said he has, so hey, he couldn't have done it.  I'm sure Peru complained to the OAS just for fun.
I mean hell, why not like Bush then? The majority of the United States voted for him, and he's doing what he can to make the US better. Sure, his policies are idiotic and counterproductive, but at least he's trying! He gave us all tax cuts, putting more money in their pockets.
(that last paragraph was satire, just in case it isn't clear)
| Quote: |
| I know which arsehole I would choose if I was a poor Venezualen. It's called democracy. Get over it. Worry about your own leaders (who are a far greater danger to the world) and let those people do what they want. |
Then I expect you to do the same. I hope your complaints about Israel and Bush will stop because if they don't... Then I'll complain about Chavez as much as I want, because the last thing I want to do is make you look even MORE hypocritical. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
Big Bird, where oh where did I defend the US on this thread? Where did I say the US had not interfered with elections in other countries? And how can YOU criticize the United States for doing such actions while looking the other way when Chavez does it? Can you say HYPOCRITE? I think I can.
. |
The thing is Bum Boy, you ARE American. That's why I chose to highlight American misdemeanors that run in the same vein as those you point out with regards to Chavez.
It is invariably Americans who criticise Chavez. Why? Because your government is pissed. Why? Because your government usually props up some other chump who is every bit as flawed (and perhaps more so) than Chavez, but who at least helps their big business buddies plunder Venezualen's natural resources as they please. If your government hadn't continually propped up Chumps in Latin America, then you might be more entitled to complain about this current Chump. But why do you complain so much about this particular Chump? Because as a nation, you are pissed that this Chump is not in your pocket. You yourself may not have thought of it that way, but the corporate media in your country is informing your view (yes I know you will protest that - you have a critical mind of your own blah blah), and you have clearly been inbued with the sentiments and opinions expressed...
I'm sure that right now, if the Chump leading Venezuala had been backed by the US government, you'd have no interest in him at all. None of his flaws would have been examined or highlighted in such noble newsrags as the NYT or the Economist. It wouldn't be a topic.
Britain also has a glorious history of propping up Chumps. However, we do not bare the brunt of guilt in this particular case - or I would gladly take pot shots at my own useless government. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
Big Bird, where oh where did I defend the US on this thread? Where did I say the US had not interfered with elections in other countries? And how can YOU criticize the United States for doing such actions while looking the other way when Chavez does it? Can you say HYPOCRITE? I think I can.
. |
The thing is Bum Boy, you ARE American. That's why I chose to highlight American misdemeanors that run in the same vein as those you point out with regards to Chavez.
It is invariably Americans who criticise Chavez. Why? Because your government is pissed. Why? Because your government usually props up some other chump who is every bit as flawed (and perhaps more so) than Chavez, but who at least helps their big business buddies plunder Venezualen's natural resources as they please. If your government hadn't continually propped up Chumps in Latin America, then you might be more entitled to complain about this current Chump. But why do you complain so much about this particular Chump? Because as a nation, you are pissed that this Chump is not in your pocket. You yourself may not have thought of it that way, but the corporate media in your country is informing your view (yes I know you will protest that - you have a critical mind of your own blah blah), and you have clearly been inbued with the sentiments and opinions expressed...
I'm sure that right now, if the Chump leading Venezuala had been backed by the US government, you'd have no interest in him at all. None of his flaws would have been examined or highlighted in such noble newsrags as the NYT or the Economist. It wouldn't be a topic.
Britain also has a glorious history of propping up Chumps. However, we do not bare the brunt of guilt in this particular case - or I would gladly take pot shots at my own useless government. |
I'll leave it at this: you're generalizing this to the extreme. You're assuming that all us Americans don't like Chavez for the same reason. That is far from the case.
I merely am arguing he is incompetant and is not a good leader. I'm not proposing he gets booted by undemocratic means. Venezula can do whatever it wants, I could care less.
I did not create this thread, someone else did. If someone else had brought up another dictator, I would have given my two cents. Who else would you like to discuss? How about Sudan's President Bashir? I felt like throwing up when watching him on C-Span speaking to the UN.
How about Musharraff? He's propped up by the United states but gets ripped by the economist. He gets of negative press from the NY Times as well. Oh well, there goes THAT theory.
What other dictators get propped up by the US gov't? Saudi? Debatable, but there has been lots of press about the Saudis, much of which has been negative. would you like me to look them up and post THOSE too?
And what dictators are we propping up in Latin America right now? Oh wait, we aren't, nor have we since the cold war. I admit I could be wrong (just going by memory) so feel feel to correct me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 8:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| ...while looking the other way when Chavez does it...I'm sure Peru complained to the OAS just for fun. |
Latin Americans have been interfering in each others' political processes and engaging in back-door, illegal diplomacy against their neighbors since Argentina's Juan Manuel de Rosas (who ran the equivalent of covert ops against Urugauy and Paraguay in the early nineteenth century) and Rafael Carrera and other Guatemalas like Juan Jose Arevalo and his so-called Caribbean League, who launched mercenary invasions against dictators and unfriendly (to his govt) govts in Costa Rica, Colombia, Venezuela, and the Dominican Republic in the late 1940s and early 1950s.
Speaking of the Dominican Republic and Venezuela (and let's add Cuba), Trujillo, Betancourt, and Castro made up a nice little triangle of three people trying to murder each other in 1960-1961. Betancourt allowed Castro-backed Dominican exiles to launch attacks against Trujillo from the Venezuelan coast, and Trujillo returned the favor by allowing Cuban exiles residing in the Dominican Republic to use his country as a base of operations as well. Trujillo, as is well known, sent an assassination team against Betancourt, who used a preplaced bomb as a device to get him in his car (knowing his route in advance). Betancourt escaped, with badly burned hands. But let us just say that he was not amused.
He went to the OAS and demanded and promptly got a unanimous resolution adopted. Every state in the Americas placed an embargo on the Dominican Republic. Then Betancourt pressured the Eisenhower and Kennedy govts that if the U.S. expected support from Betancourt and those who sympathized with him in Latin America on initiatives such as the Alliance for Progress (and there were many in the U.S. who sympathized with him as well, incidentally, as he was a respected moderate, and not hostile to the U.S.), then Washington would have to move, forcefully, against Trujillo. Betancourt pretty much shamed Eisenhower and Kennedy by arguing (correctly) that Washington's policy looked as if the U.S. only objected to leftist tyrants, and did not mind rightist tyrants. We all know where that led...
Later, we know that Castro and the Sandinista regime went after the Salvadoran govt in the 1980s, and Reagan, as is also well known, blamed the Soviets and responded with extreme firepower, thus enflaming all of Central America for about a decade.
When writing about Casey and his CIA-sponsored interventions in this conflict, the so-called Contra War, Woodward also touches on Brazilian-sponsored covert ops against the Guyanas -- the Brazilians wanted Brazil-friendly govts established there. Why not? They have always attempted to make themselves the region's mini-superpower -- as have the Argentines, from time to time. Indeed, Mexico does the same with respect to Guatemala and the rest of Central America.
In any case, comes now Hugo Chavez, picking up Che Guevara and Fidel Castro's old banner of hemispheric revolution from the early 1960s (and let us not forget that Castro intervened all over Northern and SubSaharan Africa from the early 1960s through the mid-1970s, either), who, allegedly, has run some kind of covert ops against Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, and Colombia (and others).
Of course, throughout the nineteenth century, the British, Germans, and French were running military missions and the equivalent of covert ops (see esp. British involvement in stirring up Chile's civil war over control of nitrate interests) all over South America.
What is the point of all of this? Is this an attempt by a mindless, patriotic American drone to defend the Great Satan by distracting everyone from "the real issue"?
Hardly.
People are so caught up in a bitterly critical (indeed overly critical) U.S.-centric worldview that they simply cannot see that Latin America and the Caribbean are, well, simply Latin America and the Caribbean. As one former Secret Service agent told me, "basically, you can shoot anyone there as long as it isn't a prominent citizen, and nobody notices..."
Also driving this U.S.-centrist bias, no one else declassifies dox or convenes Congressional hearings and investigations like we do. In Latin America this is not so much from a disingenuous way of operating (and in Chavez's case, by the way, that is exactly what it is) as it is that these places are just extremely disorganized.
Anyone ever looked around in Chilean or Brazilian archives and national libraries? I have. Interestingly enough, in his latest book on U.S. intervention in Chilean affairs, British researcher Jonathan Haslam complained that when he went to Chile, no one even knew where the archives from the Allende regime were.
So, yeah, knowing all of this, and I have no doubt that Chavez does, he is grandstanding and playing on simplistic stereotypes. And, perhaps not surprisingly, people are lapping it up.
Therefore, when self-righteous, preachy critics like Big_Bird look at Latin American and Caribbean political affairs today and see nothing but the U.S. acting in bad faith, I am somewhat skeptical that they really understand anything at all about Latin American and Caribbean political affairs, which, as most of us know, have been unstable, chaotic, repressive, and violent as early as two hundred years or so before Plymouth Colony even existed in any Brit's imagination.
What critics like Big_Bird present, then, ultimately, is Chavez and others' presentist anti-U.S. propaganda line. And that, knowing Big_Bird, is simply unsurprising (even unoriginal). She is a tool; a Chavez groupie.
By the way, Bucheon, excepting Castro, there are no significant Cold War-era dictators left in Latin America today. They mostly fell by the wayside between the 1970s and 1990s. Pinochet was the last of them... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChuckECheese
Joined: 20 Jul 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 10:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bottom line? In my personal AMERICAN view, Chavez is just another a$$hole dictator, and a self-serving biggot.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dulouz
Joined: 04 Feb 2003
Location: Uranus
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 7:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
I thought this up on the subway today and I chuckled
"HUGO CHAVEZ GIVES ME GAS" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 2:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| b) Citgo (mentioned by a previous poster) is a major player in the US enegy market. Chavez is shooting himself in the foot. |
Didn't realize I'd be right so quickly:
7-11 Drops Citgo as Gas Supplier
| Quote: |
7-Eleven Inc. dropped Venezuela-owned Citgo as its gasoline supplier after more than 20 years as part of a previously announced plan by the convenience store operator to launch its own brand of fuel.
7-Eleven officials said Wednesday that the decision was partly motivated by politics. |
| Quote: |
"Regardless of politics, we sympathize with many Americans' concern over derogatory comments about our country and its leadership recently made by Venezuela's president," said 7-Eleven spokeswoman Margaret Chabris.
"Certainly Chavez's position and statements over the past year or so didn't tempt us to stay with Citgo," she added. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Looks like 7-11 is joining Colombia, Mexico, Peru, Ecuador, Chile, and Israel in reevaluating what kind of relationship is possible with the Chavez regime given its simplistic, hyper-offensive, and non-diplomatic tendencies...(not to mention its alleged political intervention in the affairs of its neighbors' and others' internal affairs).
See this thread, too, by the way...
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/korea/viewtopic.php?t=64552 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
