Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Another American backed coup happening in Venezuela

1…1213151718…24

Comments

  • #422
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,277 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    Mod Note

    Hi folks,

    Quick reminder of the sitewide rule regarding language
    English is the mother tongue of Ireland and is the language that the vast majority of our populace speaks. If you wish to speak in any other language, you must provide an English translation for what you're saying - it's just good manners.


  • #423
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,012 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    Irish Praetorian wrote: »
    I'm sorry to interrupt this train of 'isn't the US just awful' but we seem to have hit upon a bit of a bug bear of mine, namely the rush to criticize the US for just about ever and any failure in the world without any sense of context or proportionately.... intervention because apparently intervention is fine so long as the guys carry AK's and not M16s) which looks like it might send Venezuela down the Belarus route, or risk a civil war as above. Not a great selection of options but if there are any other likely scenarios maybe people can point them out.

    Some great points.
    Reading over the thread any criticism of the US is met with cries of 'typical blame the US for everything' or 'just about everything', which in turn leads to like level rebuttals.
    IMO the US are not interfering, or threatening to physically interfere in Venezuela for anything other than selfish motives. They support and arm dictators. They support the Israeli regime. They removed themselves from the UN council of Human Rights. The UN or similar should oversee fair elections ASAP. Any other moves will only cause upset and upheaval, possibly civil war.


  • #424
    Spannerplank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 167 ✭✭Spannerplank


    Gatling wrote: »
    I take it that's all your evidence to back up your claims


    Captain and 2nd lieutenant insignia


    Uniforms are correct for Venezuela

    Are you sure about that?


  • #425
    Irish Praetorian
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,745 ✭✭✭Irish Praetorian


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    Some great points.
    Reading over the thread any criticism of the US is met with cries of 'typical blame the US for everything' or 'just about everything', which in turn leads to like level rebuttals.
    IMO the US are not interfering, or threatening to physically interfere in Venezuela for anything other than selfish motives. They support and arm dictators. They support the Israeli regime. They removed themselves from the UN council of Human Rights. The UN or similar should oversee fair elections ASAP. Any other moves will only cause upset and upheaval, possibly civil war.

    Well you've made a set of points so I shall do my best to address them.

    To the question of motivation - it's indeed quite likely the US has selfish motivations for any kind of intervention in Venezuela, who exactly wouldn't have selfish motivations for intervening in another country? Do you imagine China backs North Korea due to a desire to ensure the North Korean populace are kept well-fed and free from political persecution? Quite clearly not, instead they desire a buffer state. The more salient issue is motivation aside, whether US intervention would have a positive or negative effect. Now plainly in most instances this would be negative - but for a country run into economic ruin that has lost a few million of its populace and has ruined its democratic institutions, well that's where US involvement starts to look a lot less damaging.

    As for supporting dictators and the Israeli regime - well yes they do, along with pretty much every other major power in the world as I've stated above. Incidentally I probably don't have as much an issue with the Israelis as you but that's quite clearly a separate topic. The salient question which people want to avoid is how things play out when those dictatorships turn to other patrons. Lets take the example of the Arab Spring - several states facing a lot of internal upheaval and anger, what happened to the US aligned states like Tunisia, Libya and Egypt? The US didn't defend 'their' dicators, and instead they got overthrown. Compare that with Syria, where Assad was able to parlay Russian patronage into significant military and international support. Simply put, what is the gain for liberty if the Saudis are killing MiGs instead of F16s?

    Lastly on the point of the UN; you want to remove the US from the UNSC. Fine, that would leave it in the hands of the UK, France (with its own network of post-colonial clients) and the august nations of China and Russia. Does that really sound like a setup which is more or less conducive to a better tomorrow? Should China's position not be reconsidered for its protection of Sudan during the Fur genocide? How about Russia in eastern Ukraine? I'm all for a an idealized vision of future international politics, but I don't believe it doing it through a prism that see's only American failings - what we need is consistency and coherency in international policy.


  • #426
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,012 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    Irish Praetorian wrote: »
    Well you've made a set of points so I shall do my best to address them.

    To the question of motivation - it's indeed quite likely the US has selfish motivations for any kind of intervention in Venezuela, who exactly wouldn't have selfish motivations for intervening in another country? Do you imagine China backs North Korea due to a desire to ensure the North Korean populace are kept well-fed and free from political persecution? Quite clearly not, instead they desire a buffer state. The more salient issue is motivation aside, whether US intervention would have a positive or negative effect. Now plainly in most instances this would be negative - but for a country run into economic ruin that has lost a few million of its populace and has ruined its democratic institutions, well that's where US involvement starts to look a lot less damaging.

    As for supporting dictators and the Israeli regime - well yes they do, along with pretty much every other major power in the world as I've stated above. Incidentally I probably don't have as much an issue with the Israelis as you but that's quite clearly a separate topic. The salient question which people want to avoid is how things play out when those dictatorships turn to other patrons. Lets take the example of the Arab Spring - several states facing a lot of internal upheaval and anger, what happened to the US aligned states like Tunisia, Libya and Egypt? The US didn't defend 'their' dicators, and instead they got overthrown. Compare that with Syria, where Assad was able to parlay Russian patronage into significant military and international support. Simply put, what is the gain for liberty if the Saudis are killing MiGs instead of F16s?

    Lastly on the point of the UN; you want to remove the US from the UNSC. Fine, that would leave it in the hands of the UK, France (with its own network of post-colonial clients) and the august nations of China and Russia. Does that really sound like a setup which is more or less conducive to a better tomorrow? Should China's position not be reconsidered for its protection of Sudan during the Fur genocide? How about Russia in eastern Ukraine? I'm all for a an idealized vision of future international politics, but I don't believe it doing it through a prism that see's only American failings - what we need is consistency and coherency in international policy.

    To cite the Cranberries debut album, "Everybody else is doing it so why can't we?". Explaining why they might interfere with countries and set up dictators doesn't deny they do it, which was my only point regarding any idea the US are involved to help the populace.

    Not at all. I said:
    They removed themselves from the UN council of Human Rights.

    All you are doing is putting up possible reasons why they set up, arm and in Trump's case admire some dictatorships. I was pointing out that they do, they don't necessarily have the Venezuelan peoples interests in mind and we should cautiously look carefully at siding with the US in international affairs based on their record. Elections ASAP are preferable, but then they can't be guaranteed their man will win.


  • Advertisement
  • #427
    Jimmy Garlic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,331 ✭✭✭Jimmy Garlic


    While I agree there should be fair elections in Venezuela it is at the point now where the Russians and possibly the Chinese should send military advisors and assistance to Venezuela to deter US aggression. US troops are already en route to Columbia.


  • #428
    Irish Praetorian
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,745 ✭✭✭Irish Praetorian


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    To cite the Cranberries debut album, "Everybody else is doing it so why can't we?". Explaining why they might interfere with countries and set up dictators doesn't deny they do it, which was my only point regarding any idea the US are involved to help the populace.

    Not at all. I said:

    All you are doing is putting up possible reasons why they set up, arm and in Trump's case admire some dictatorships. I was pointing out that they do, they don't necessarily have the Venezuelan peoples interests in mind and we should cautiously look carefully at siding with the US in international affairs based on their record. Elections ASAP are preferable, but then they can't be guaranteed their man will win.

    All-right well if we're clear on the realpolitik considerations behind a lot of US foreign policy actions in the pre and post Cold War periods, then we can move to the question of motivation. To be frank I think my point about this issue would be that it should maybe rank a little bit lower in terms of our concerns than practical implications. Infact I would go so far as to say this is the crucial point - if we are going to look at international politics through the realm of 'intentions' we might end up with a very stilted view. The USSR arguably had the noblest of intentions, specifically world revolution and the liberation of the working class; the practical reality was of course nothing less than the creation of totalitarian dictatorship veneered in red. By contrast the track record of those parts of the world where US influence was pre-eminent such as South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, have tended to do far better in the present day that their (sometimes ex-)Communist counterparts. Maduro's regime may have had the same noble intentions, that doesn't change the reality that their actions have stunted Venezuela economically and politically.

    As to the point on US withdrawal from the UNHRC, quite frankly I think it was the right decision and wouldn't oppose any modern nation doing the same. As a product of the bloc voting system of the wider UNGA, the HRC is little more than a vehicle for regular expressions of anti-Israeli sentiment, so much so that it has passed more resolutions condemning Israel than the rest of the world combined. It is a body of little value and even less power, reflective more of international prejudices and horse-trading than any idealistic pretensions.


  • #429
    Spannerplank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 167 ✭✭Spannerplank


    Good loser wrote: »
    What insufferable priggishness!


    Post after post you looked for proof of flamingo/rat eating and when you get the flamingo 'proof' you resort to the rats. Amazing you didn't look for a video of the birds actually being eaten? Did it occur at all to you that they might be slaughtering the flamingos to feed their pet rats?


    If you got a free one way ticket to Venezuela would you take it? Or a two way?

    I had the grace to accept that flamingos are being eaten as a result of a food supply crisis in Venezuela.

    I held my hand up and accepted that it appeared to be the case.

    I still have my doubts about people eating rats. And I have seen no evidence of famine.

    If you choose to de!over your nasty and puerile smiles in the face of a legitimate discussion then that's your prerogative. But it just paints you as a facetious person.

    The report reads of people killing flamingos for food in remote areas. And shotgun shells found close by. Does it not?

    I'll accept the Miami Herald article. What I won't accept is the situation being embellished. And I emphasised that.

    Children in Calcutta rummage through tips everyday. And before anyone screams "this is about Venezuela not India" I would say "be quiet".

    Why is the thought of Venezuelans so emotive?
    Why do they have shortages?

    Have you taken the time to objectively examine the situation or are you just "anyone criticises America bad. Anyone who doesn't good"


  • #430
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,546 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Jimmy Garlic wrote: »
    While I agree there should be fair elections in Venezuela it is at the point now where the Russians and possibly the Chinese should send military advisors and assistance to Venezuela to deter US aggression. US troops are already en route to Columbia.

    The Chinese and Russians of course being well known proponents of free & fair elections?


  • #431
    Spannerplank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 167 ✭✭Spannerplank


    Gatling wrote: »
    I take it that's all your evidence to back up your claims


    Captain and 2nd lieutenant insignia


    Uniforms are correct for Venezuela

    These guys are recent defectors according to themselves and the CNN report, yes?


  • Advertisement
  • #432
    Spannerplank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 167 ✭✭Spannerplank


    Topgear on Dave wrote: »
    The Chinese and Russians of course being well known proponents of free & fair elections?

    Actually Venezuela and Iceland are the two most democratic countries in the world in that they are the only countries where a sitting leader can be recalled at anytime.


  • #433
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,012 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    Irish Praetorian wrote: »
    All-right well if we're clear on the realpolitik considerations behind a lot of US foreign policy actions in the pre and post Cold War periods, then we can move to the question of motivation. To be frank I think my point about this issue would be that it should maybe rank a little bit lower in terms of our concerns than practical implications. Infact I would go so far as to say this is the crucial point - if we are going to look at international politics through the realm of 'intentions' we might end up with a very stilted view. The USSR arguably had the noblest of intentions, specifically world revolution and the liberation of the working class; the practical reality was of course nothing less than the creation of totalitarian dictatorship veneered in red. By contrast the track record of those parts of the world where US influence was pre-eminent such as South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, have tended to do far better in the present day that their (sometimes ex-)Communist counterparts. Maduro's regime may have had the same noble intentions, that doesn't change the reality that their actions have stunted Venezuela economically and politically.

    As to the point on US withdrawal from the UNHRC, quite frankly I think it was the right decision and wouldn't oppose any modern nation doing the same. As a product of the bloc voting system of the wider UNGA, the HRC is little more than a vehicle for regular expressions of anti-Israeli sentiment, so much so that it has passed more resolutions condemning Israel than the rest of the world combined. It is a body of little value and even less power, reflective more of international prejudices and horse-trading than any idealistic pretensions.

    Valid if we are assuming the US only back regimes that treat their people well. They don't. On the point of a Russian regime versus a US regime, there's no guarantee on which might be better for the people it's foisted upon.
    If anti-Israeli sentiment is deemed warranted on the grounds of Human Rights violations, then that's that particular body doing their job IMO and for the US, if Human Rights abuses depend on who is carrying them out, maybe they were right to withdraw rather than keep up the charade.


  • #434
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,247 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    Jimmy Garlic wrote: »
    While I agree there should be fair elections in Venezuela it is at the point now where the Russians and possibly the Chinese should send military advisors and assistance to Venezuela to deter US aggression. US troops are already en route to Columbia.

    The only super power that hasnt turned its military against its own people since the civil war and youre worried about them.....

    In the Donald Trump thread every single person is posting 'trump in bed with russia, bad russia, bad putin, scary times' some of the same people here 'russia should be involved because 'bad america, bad trump, scary times'

    In terms of people who could help Venezuela , the US is the best of all the 'evils' even if your view of 'evil' is the reality, which , its not.


  • #435
    Gatling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Spannerplank wrote: »
    These guys are recent defectors according to themselves and the CNN report, yes?

    Yes by all accounts ,

    And with defectors they maintain their ranks and chain of command
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • #436
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,031 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Spannerplank wrote: »
    These guys are recent defectors according to themselves and the CNN report, yes?

    Yes, why?
    Spannerplank wrote: »
    Actually Venezuela and Iceland are the two most democratic countries in the world in that they are the only countries where a sitting leader can be recalled at anytime.

    I suspect what we are looking at here is the difference between theory and practical reality.


  • #437
    Gatling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Topgear on Dave wrote: »
    The Chinese and Russians of course being well known proponents of free & fair elections?

    Next there will be calls for deployment of chemical weapons to keep the population in their places ,

    The last lot of Russian military advisors didn't fare well against American / Kurdish forces in Syria
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • #438
    Irish Praetorian
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,745 ✭✭✭Irish Praetorian


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    Valid if we are assuming the US only back regimes that treat their people well. They don't. On the point of a Russian regime versus a US regime, there's no guarantee on which might be better for the people it's foisted upon.
    If anti-Israeli sentiment is deemed warranted on the grounds of Human Rights violations, then that's that particular body doing their job IMO and for the US, if Human Rights abuses depend on who is carrying them out, maybe they were right to withdraw rather than keep up the charade.


    Oh I've made no claim about the US exclusively backing decent regimes, in-fact I've made very much the opposite claim. However, on balance their track record is very much superior to their closest rivals, particularly compared with regimes and power blocs that have purported to be doing so for benevolent reasons.


    As to the point of the UNHRC, I'm sorry but this is a circle I cannot square - if an international body is convinced that Israel is committing greater abuses of human rights than the rest of the world combined, to my mind that body rotten beyond redemption. And this is hardly a defence of Israel which I think we will both agree is a troubled state, but rather an indictment of such a rotten system of politicking that has little worth. Consistency and cogency must be the foundations of an international order, not abeyance to convenient voting blocs.


  • #439
    markodaly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,473 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    breatheme wrote: »
    I am a leftie through and through, but even then: Venezuela is a mess and has been for more than two decades. Maduro has consistently incarcerated or outright murdered opposing journalists and politicians. If the country will ever move forward, he needs to step down.

    I'm not the biggest fan of Trump. But come on, Finland has recognised Guaidó as well. As INTERIM president.

    As has Sweden, France, Germany, Switzerland and most countries you want on your side. These countries recognise Guaido as INTERM president until free and fair elections are held.

    Meanwhile, paragons of human rights and democracy in China, Russia, Syria, North Korea and Iran support the dictator Maduro and the status quo.

    If you are happy with the status quo you are on the same side as every despotic nation on earth and refuse the need or desire to have free and fair elections.

    https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/02/06/maduro-vs-guaido-a-global-scorecard-map-infographic/

    People are blinded by their hatred of the US and Trump that they can't see past their own bias on this issue, which is par of the course really for those trendy woke lefties.


  • #440
    markodaly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,473 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Jimmy Garlic wrote: »
    It supports at least one monarchy straight out of the dark ages, the house of Saud. The US has made it clear time and time again that it doesn't care one iota about people, just business and what it can loot, doesn't matter who dies or how many....and you are dead right it never had a problem with dictators, Pol Pot is just one example of a dictator they supported, Saddam Hussein was their golden boy for ages, there are almost countless examples.

    I have seen you mention American support for Pol Pot before and to be honest that is not a fair reflection on what actually happened. The reality is more nuanced and complicated. It as more of not standing in the way of Chinese support for the Khmer Rouge to stop Vietnam dominating Indo-China. This was also during Jimmy Carters presidency, the liberals hero.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_United_States_support_for_the_Khmer_Rouge

    Anyway, its off topic really.


  • #441
    Spannerplank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 167 ✭✭Spannerplank


    Gatling wrote: »
    Yes by all accounts ,

    And with defectors they maintain their ranks and chain of command

    So if they are recent defectors why are they wearing uniforms that are years out of date?


  • Advertisement
  • #442
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,031 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Spannerplank wrote: »
    So if they are recent defectors why are they wearing uniforms that are years out of date?

    According to Camopedia, the Venezuelan military started issuing the modified M81 pattern last year. A quick search indicates that they were being worn at least by July 2018, given soldiers wearing it in their big parade that Maduro held.

    And, FWIW, uniforms don’t change immediately anyway. I am wearing UCP, but the US Army introduced OCP as the new standard in 2015. I have until 2028 to have my Pinks and Greens to use instead of my Blues.


  • #443
    Gatling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Spannerplank wrote: »

    So if they are recent defectors why are they wearing uniforms that are years out of date?

    Who said they are years out of date ,it's still an effective camouflage
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • #444
    Spannerplank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 167 ✭✭Spannerplank


    Manic Moran wrote: »
    According to Camopedia, the Venezuelan military started issuing the modified M81 pattern last year.

    And, FWIW, uniforms don’t change immediately anyway. I am wearing UCP, but the US Army introduced OCP as the new standard in 2015. I have until 2028 to have my Pinks and Greens to use instead of my Blues.

    That's very informative.
    Thank you.

    So you are stating that your combat clothing determines your time within a military unit?

    Are designs or orders or even procedures something that change over time?


  • #445
    Spannerplank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 167 ✭✭Spannerplank


    Gatling wrote: »
    Who said they are years out of date ,it's still an effective camouflage

    What do you notice about those uniforms?


  • #446
    AngryHippie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,625 ✭✭✭AngryHippie


    Spannerplank wrote: »
    What do you notice about those uniforms?

    They look quite new.
    They are quite fetching, in a tall dark and handsome kind of way :confused:
    (if you are into that sort of thing)

    I think you are the only one that gives a donald duck about the uniforms or that clip fwiw.

    Everyone else seems to be focused on the bleeding obvious:

    Venezuela and its citizens are in deep poo.
    The US is trying to exert influence there (not necessarily in a bad way).
    Other Superpowers are also meddling in the region (not necessarily in a good way).
    Its not a coup (yet) or a civil war (yet) and the Venezuelans don't seem to want one.
    They need humanitarian assistance.

    Spiffy shirts and insignia have Shiite all to do with it ?


  • #447
    Gatling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Spannerplank wrote: »
    What do you notice about those uniforms?

    Nothing unusual -

    Enlighten us you made several claims but backed nothing up so ...
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • #448
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,031 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Spannerplank wrote: »
    That's very informative.
    Thank you.

    So you are stating that your combat clothing determines your time within a military unit?

    Are designs or orders or even procedures something that change over time?

    Not directly, but it can be an indicator, at least in the US. When a new uniform pattern is introduced, folks going through Basic get the new uniforms as their issue, so they are going to be amongst the first to be wearing them. Older hands will have a wear-out date by which time the new uniforms must be acquired. They may be worn sooner, but it is optional. In my case, i’m wearing UCP until the last possible moment because I have no interest in putting wear and tear on the OCP until I have to when the UCP ones work fine. Some other folks think it demonstrates investment in the organization by moving to the new uniform before it is mandatory to do so.

    0af1e8f2.jpg

    Not sure I understand the second half of the question.

    I have no idea why this is relevant, though.


  • #449
    Spannerplank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 167 ✭✭Spannerplank


    Gatling wrote: »
    Nothing unusual -

    Enlighten us you made several claims but backed nothing up so ...


    For a self proclaimed military expert.

    You can't see it?


  • #450
    Gatling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Spannerplank wrote: »
    For a self proclaimed military expert.

    You can't see it?

    Never said that.


    What they are American M81 woodland BDUs .

    Do tell .
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • Advertisement
  • #451
    Spannerplank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 167 ✭✭Spannerplank


    What happened to the B, FANS?


Advertisement