And where were you when Videla's government was kidnapping and killing innocent people. Were you still vocal?
I was to young to say and do anything. People my age in your country were depending on your help. You let them down.
Honestly you should just STFU because if any Chileans read this they would be ing pissed off. And no I don't support Castro. LMAO at you telling me to get out of America. I have contributed way more to the U.S. than many of your friends on this board have or ever will. You might want to tell them to put up or shut up. And I'm not quiet when I see injustices and human rights violations. You should have taken a cue from that.
First off this wasn't addressed to you. So I never asked you this question. And as I said before you might want to STFU because you sound like a right-wing nut that supports murderers.
Ohhh I know the history you don't have to try and give me a lesson. You do nothing but distort it anyways.I'm not trivializing anything, SoCal moron.
So as I asked you before. Were you lying about what Chavez has done? Were you trivializing what happened in Argentina and Chile? Or did you just misspeak?
It is? Which part? I'd be interested in more details on this...
And then after we do that, you can explain to me why you think that gives you an excuse to be stupid...
.anyway, giuliani got chavez-pwned, ing hilarious
Assuming that's true...since you are a Chavez supporter, doesn't that make you a Guilianni supporter as well?
Last edited by whottt; 03-16-2007 at 03:24 AM.
Why should I? You don't let having a stupid opinion keep you from posting yours...
There's nothing socialist really about the NBA's salary cap...I'd say it's a pretty good example social programs within a Capitalist framework via taxation at best...not an example of socialism.
There's no hard cap in place to keep the teams from spending money. If they truly desire to do so, they can(See Knicks, NY).
The Spurs are a poor team(allegedly), not a communist one...there's nothing wrong with being poor, only something wrong with viewing communism and socialism as the solution. See..every time it has been tried as an example.
The NFL Cap is a better example of socialism...and it sucks, and the NFL has not continued to grow in popularity at the rate it was doing prior to the cap. I'd say the hard cap in the NFL hurts teams...
You make it sound as if Videla and the other generals woke up one day and decided to kidnap inocent people. And you also must be deaf or illiterate because I said in more than one occasion . . . WHAT WAS GOING ON IN ARGENTINA WAS A WAR (block letters might help you here). 75% of the population begged Videla to take power. Why the do you keep dismissing these facts? They committed excesses, no question about. I never trivialized this historical truth. But they were in the middle of a war (a) they did not start, (b) they were asked to help, and (c) the enemy was even bloodier than the military.
Go and ask you Argentine friends which have missing relatives (the hundreds you claim to know) who Firmenich was and how many people he kidnapped and killed. Find about who Pedro Aramburu was and how this criminal murdered him and then wrote a book about it.
And another thing that pisses me off: these ing terrorists, the ones that unlikely survived, keep living their lives as if nothing happened and never repented of what they did. Some of them are even part of the current Argentine governemnt. The military, OTOH, did a mea culpa.
Those Montoneros and their supporters are di able.
And I do not see you as appaled with them as you are with Videla. Very telling.
It's pretty clear you have no clue what happened in my country in the 70s. You were too young to live through it and you have only heard the communist's POV. Read about it, inform yourselve and come back. Till then, STFU.
Again you show your lack of knowledge about LatAm history, you ignorant . You probably spoke to a few communist Chileans who spoonfed you their side of the story, which is always distorted with lies.
Pinochet's candidate in 1988, Buchi, when democracy was reinstalled in Chile, had more than 40% of the popular vote. Yeah, those Chileans sure do hate Pinochet
The entire country of Chile was up in arms when the Brits put Pinochet in jail in 1999 (except a few thousand comunistas) at the request of Baltazar Garzon, another politically motivated Spanish prosecutor.
So don't worry, most of the Chileans that read what I write would agree with me, even if they don't like Pinochet. Why? Because it's the truth. Pinochet left a country which was on it's way to being what it is today: the most stable and fastest growing economy in Latin America, with the most private sector investment and the less corrupt. Can you imagine where Chile would be if Allende would've stayed in power? Probably not because you do not even know who Allende is.
You sure do support people who support Castro, i.e. Chavez.And no I don't support Castro.
Prove it. All you have proven up to now is that you like Chavez, a blatant enemy of the US. Where do you stand on the Iranian president? Because Chavez loves that idiot too.LMAO at you telling me to get out of America. I have contributed way more to the U.S. than many of your friends on this board have or ever will.
And I'm not quiet when I see injustices and human rights violations. You should have taken a cue from that.
You are so full of !
Cuba and Venezuela are full of human right violations. 6 pages of this thread (and counting) and never once have you condemned them.
You are a ing stooge.
I sure don't care how you think I sound. I said many times I did not support murders of innocent people.
You, OTOH, support a guy who wants to rule Venezuela for the next 20 years, and in the process destroiy the country the same way Castro destroyed Cuba.
Name them.
And also name what you support of his regime.
OK smeagol since you continue to duck the question.
Were you lying about Chavez? Trivializing what happened in the past? Or did you just misspeak?
So how exactly is Chavez worse than these dictators? What human rights violations has Chavez done? If he has I would definitely want to know about it. It will definitely change my opinion of him.
Also I laugh at how you think the only people that disagree with what Videla and Pinochet did have been fed communist talking points. I know you think the ends justify the means, but come on now.
And yes the NBA salary cap is socialist. There are many different forms of socialism. There is not only one form of it. The NFL is stricter, but the NBA is a form of socialism.
And yes I agree with you about the Montoneros and their supporters. As for why I haven't condemned them like I have Videla, it's because nobody is over here supporting them. If someone was I'd talk the same amount of .
I'd like to once again visit the following post made by P&G:
Seems to me that you can't stay away from Smeagol.
Yes I really don't have any time for him, but I'm not gonna sit back and let him lie to you guys and not call him out on his bull . I'm just here exposing him for what he really is.
His credibility on the subject.... is... I'm sorry to say...... Much, much more valid than yours since he actually experienced the turmoil first hand.
You and him may not agree on many things but to say that smeagol is lying about events that are supported by most historical accounts... is just way off base.
He actually condemned all violent acts against innocent civilians no matter the perpetrators but understands that some of it was needed to bring about the change. He also acknowledged that the military regimes were corrupt as well. What more do you want him to say?
Furthermore, we all understand that no government is perfect. But a governing body will always be inherently flawed when led at the whims of any one individual (aka a dictator) - and you seem to imply that this is a much better solution. Half of us disagree. Of course, you're obviously en led to your opinion, but if you really feel that our democratic free-enterprise system is less ideal than a socialistic one then you really ought to consider living under said governing state. Talking from the outside won't give you the credibility you seek on the matter... and doing so ends up exposing you as a fraud.
So if somebody lived through something that means they are automatically right and have the most valid opinion? I didn't realize that 100% of the population that live through the same events agree. I know many people that also lived through it, and their views are like night and day with those of smeagol.
What history accounts support his opinion?You and him may not agree on many things but to say that smeagol is lying about events that are supported by most historical accounts... is just way off base.
Well that's where we see differently, I don't believe "some of it was needed to bring about the change." I don't believe in the ends justify the means. The worst part about it is that he is now reflecting on it in the past tense. If it was during the time, were fear and killings were the norm, I would understand a lot more. Now that this is in the past there is no fear of being killed for dissension, but yet he continues to make excuses and rationalize what happened. That IMO is very dangerous and is something that should not be tolerated.He actually condemned all violent acts against innocent civilians no matter the perpetrators but understands that some of it was needed to bring about the change. He also acknowledged that the military regimes were corrupt as well.
What more do I want him to say? I've asked him a very simple question on how Chavez is worse of a dictator. If he can explain to me how he is worse of a dictator and back up that statement then I would leave him alone. I would even change my opinion on Chavez. But the standard he's a socialist that's why he is won't work.What more do you want him to say?
I do not believe in a total socialist government. I believe there needs to be a balance. The thing with Venezuela, as with many Latin American countries, is that it was so skewed to the right that something drastic was needed. The poor have been oppressed for way too long, and not in the regular fashion that somebody from the United States would understand. That is the reason why these people are getting elected. Now the difference with Chavez and the other dictators we have been speaking about is that I have not heard of any human rights violations. If I am wrong about that, then I will admit that I was wrong about my opinion of him. And to let you know, I have lived in countries that you would consider socialist. Not to the extent of a Cuba or China, but I do actually have some first hand knowledge.Furthermore, we all understand that no government is perfect. But a governing body will always be inherently flawed when led at the whims of any one individual (aka a dictator) - and you seem to imply that this is a much better solution. Half of us disagree. Of course, you're obviously en led to your opinion, but if you really feel that our democratic free-enterprise system is less ideal than a socialistic one then you really ought to consider living under said governing state. Talking from the outside won't give you the credibility you seek on the matter... and doing so ends up exposing you as a fraud.
None of the above.
Both Pinochet and Videla rose to power because of one reason: to fight communism. They are the direct result of the people rising against a national threat that jeopardized the fabric of their societies.So how exactly is Chavez worse than these dictators?
In the case of Pinochet, the human rights violations were very small. And again, Pinochet helped the Chile's insertion into the world (something most of LatAm is far from achieving).
In the case of Videla, the human rights violations were many more than in the case of Pinochet, but as I have said many times, Argentina was going through a war.
Let me ask you a question: is Bush worst than Chavez because there are abuses and human rights violations in Iraq and Gitmo?
There are many human rights violation in Venezuela. Opposition candidates are being encacerated for no reason, there is no freedom of press, the opposition lives in fear because Chavez' mobs can attack you an minute, there is no separation of powers, Congress and the judiciary branch are totally controled by Chavez.What human rights violations has Chavez done? If he has I would definitely want to know about it. It will definitely change my opinion of him.
Not sure why you find the truth funny.Also I laugh at how you think the only people that disagree with what Videla and Pinochet did have been fed communist talking points.
Huh? This is an empty phrase which, in the context of a complex civil war, means nothing.I know you think the ends justify the means, but come on now.
So you know many people who had their relatives/friends abducted by the Junta/AAA and these "friends" of yours don't support Montoneros?
So these guys simply happened to be walking by and they were kidnapped by the military for no apparent reason? They had no connection or sympathy for Montoneros?
I think I have to call bull on your relation with these relatives of missing people.
People who went missing in the 70s were not regular joes. Most were terrorists but some were simply Montonero sympathiers and innocent until proven guilty. These guys, until this very day, continue to support Montoneros. It's hard to believe you know them and they never told you what their political affiliation is.
I haven't told a single lie and you are not exposing me. Every regular ST poster knows who I am.
Your story, on the other hand, has many holes, junior.
You believe in the American political and economic way of life then?
How the can you claim to know LatAm history and make this blatantly false statement? I already told you in a prior post all the LatAm leftist governments. Please tell me all the right wing governemts (economic wise, not political wise).The thing with Venezuela, as with many Latin American countries, is that it was so skewed to the right that something drastic was needed.
The poor have been oppressed because of corruption and lack of liberal economic measures, such as the ones implemented in Chile where poverty is at the lowest level of any LatAm country. This is exactly the opposit to what you and Chavez want for LatAm.The poor have been oppressed for way too long,
The reason Chavez got elected is corruption. Carlos Andres Perez was a crook.That is the reason why these people are getting elected.
Again, because you kow about LatAm.Now the difference with Chavez and the other dictators we have been speaking about is that I have not heard of any human rights violations.
Which countries and how enriching was living in them?And to let you know, I have lived in countries that you would consider socialist. Not to the extent of a Cuba or China, but I do actually have some first hand knowledge.
smeagol...this guys a . If the fact that he thinks socialism is a good form of government doesn't reveal this...
The fact that he thinks the NBA is socialist should leave you beyond all doubt...not to mention him lecutring you on the stife of Argentines when he's never even lived there.
Bag
Doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground, and neither does any other Chavez supporter.
Isn't it funny how it's people that trust the government the least always seem to want a govt in which the govt has absolute power?
They're like moths flying to the flame.
I know people that have lived in Cuba, China and the Soviet Union...and just about all of them have told me, it sucked, and what a huge lie everything is...
The Chinese guy I know will never see his wife and kids again unless he gets them out of China...and that's going to cost him roughly around a hundred and fifty grand(and he's a cook). He's got some nice stories about life in China...he'd rather be dead than go back.
That's the kind of illegal immigrant I want to see more of....
In case you haven't noticed...the biggest fans of socialism are ones that have never lived under it...
That's why I advocate they do.
And there two types P&G...
New ones, and military dictatorships. They all becomes military dictatorships...because they suck ass and no wants to live under one of them.
They lock their people in because everyone would ing leave if they didn't, because it ing suck...how hard is this to figure?
Chavez is an idiot.
His plan in general is not that bad - use Venezuela's natural resources to improve social status of his people and Venezuela's position in the world. However his execution sucks. His ing about USA has gotten tiring long ago, and while it's fun to see someone bash america on the big stage (like UN), it does his country and his people no good. Plus his rants while amusing to commoners are insulting for anyone intelligent (I take Castro over him anyday), and at the end of day who do you want on your side?
Which brings us to his choice of allies, which is mildly put - pathetic. You can't buy friends (ask USA) and "an enemy of my enemy is my friend" is a poor tactics too. Alliances with conditions or based on common enemy never last, and typicly desolve at the time you need them most.
The long term results of his domestic politics will be evalueted by histroy, but it is my feeling that his programs are terribly ineffective.
The final point is his sincerity - as whottt pointed out, he's in charge there for a long time and doesn't look like he has any plans of stepping down. Smells like a dictatorship - or at least a desire for it - to me (although closer to milosevic than Saddam). A trully great man doesn't seize power he walks away from it. Chavez is not a great man, he's just a loudmouth.
As for socialism - it would be a great system... if it weren't for the people. You see people are selfish and any system that is trying to base himself on solidarity of people, is going to colapse. Socialism should remain what it is - a never achievable ideal that each individual should strive for. You should not try to force it on a person or a society, it won't work and forcing something on someone never brings any good.
E viva il communismo e la liberta!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote