How Did Chavez Outmaneuver the White House on U.S. Heating Oil?

[ron damon]

I don't think he is like the majority of strongmen who have come before him.
For one thing he is not supported by the US.
I understand you now. Your like the proponents of Intellient design. You believe it is just too complex a problem to be solved, so why bother. You look for the easy way out.
What do you propose as a solution?
More right-wing coups by corporarate/capitalilst friendly strong men?

So we're now blaming the US... what a novelty . It may come as a shock, but not everything is a consequence of the US existing.

Chavez fits in Latin American culture like the rodeo in Texas, or the latte in Manhattan. Many like him have come before, and failed in everything but enriching themselves. In a couple of years there will be yet another coup, and Chavez will be replaced by another clown.

And about economics, I'll let you know when I submit my paper to the AEA.

 

[Skyhunter]

So we're now blaming the US... what a novelty . It may come as a shock, but not everything is a consequence of the US existing.

The US has a tremendous amount of influence in South America. And since the US administration is so vehemently opposed to Chavez I see them supporting any formidable challenger to Chavez, regardless of their ideals, as long as they let Exxon Mobile have access to the oil.

And about economics, I'll let you know when I submit my paper to the AEA.

Yes, please do link it to a post.

 

[alexandra]

So we're now blaming the US... what a novelty . It may come as a shock, but not everything is a consequence of the US existing.
Chavez fits in Latin American culture like the rodeo in Texas, or the latte in Manhattan. Many like him have come before, and failed in everything but enriching themselves. In a couple of years there will be yet another coup, and Chavez will be replaced by another clown.
And about economics, I'll let you know when I submit my paper to the AEA.

Yes, ron, there'll definitely be a 'coup'. Chavez is hated by right wing Americans who froth at the mouth at his humanitarian approach. Anyway, here is an article hinting strongly at what's to happen to such a bad humanitarian person such as Chavez who helps out the poor in the US (see, all, I'm on topic - the topic is about Chavez' humanitarian actions towards the poor in the US- so I expect, because I'm sticking to forum rules, that this post will not be removed/moved/deleted) :

Venezuela: Fumbling a Pop Up
By William M. Arkin
Washington Post
November 1, 2005
The Pentagon has begun contingency planning for potential military conflict with Venezuela as part of a broad post-Iraq evaluation of strategic threats to the United States.
More: http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/intervention/2005/1101venezuelaplans.htm

 

[Burnsys]

About the killing in the riots in 2001, there is a video (not shown by the media) where one can see that almos all killed or wounded where shoot in the head by snipers, most of the wounded where Pro chavez people (including his personal driver) the media used one image from a group of 5 or 6 people shotting with hand guns acros a bridge, the media sayd they where chavez people firing on unarmed manifestators. but from another video taken from a diferent angle you can see that the streets at were they where shotting (like 4 blocks away) were empty, there was no one single person in their line of fire, they were shotting at the snipers.. obviusly this images where never shown by the media. Even the producer of Globovision (on of the antichavez media in venezuela) later resigned and confesed they manipulated the images to show chavez people as the killers.

 

[kat]

http://blogs.salon.com/0001330/2005/11/22.html#a2595"

 

[Burnsys]

http://blogs.salon.com/0001330/2005/11/22.html#a2595"

Pictures like those are very comon in almost every country here in latin america, especialy those closer to the US in central america.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/04/AR2005100401546.html
Under the U.S.-sponsored "Washington consensus," or "neoliberal," model, poverty rose in Venezuela from 28 percent in the early 1980s to 85 percent when Mr. Chavez took office.

 

[Skyhunter]

Pictures like those are very comon in almost every country here in latin america, especialy those closer to the US in central america.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/04/AR2005100401546.html
Under the U.S.-sponsored "Washington consensus," or "neoliberal," model, poverty rose in Venezuela from 28 percent in the early 1980s to 85 percent when Mr. Chavez took office.

I give the Washington Times a little more credibility than a right-wing blog.

Your post became suspect Kat when they accused Chavez of giving away their wealth.

This is not the case. He is selling the oil directly to Massachusetts at cost.

[edit]Well maybe not the Washington Times, but the Washington Post is more credible than a right-wing blog site with some pictures that could be from anywhere.

 

[ron damon]

Yes, ron, there'll definitely be a 'coup'. Chavez is hated by right wing Americans who froth at the mouth at his humanitarian approach.

-sigh- couldn't it be rather that those "rabid" Americans have a little more insight about the nature of Chavez, and the threat he poses to the entire region? It never ceases to amaze me how easily deluded Left-wing people are... would you indulge me and do a search on Alan Garcia, of whom Chavez is but a clone, and tell me why do you think the experience should be repeated?

see, all, I'm on topic - the topic is about Chavez' humanitarian actions towards the poor in the US- so I expect, because I'm sticking to forum rules, that this post will not be removed/moved/deleted) :

We're not automatons here. No lively or wothwhile discussion can ever stay strictly "on topic".

 

[Anttech]

-sigh- couldn't it be rather that those "rabid" Americans have a little more insight about the nature of Chavez, and the threat he poses to the entire region?

Nope... Those "Rabid" Americans don't seem to have any insite anywhere outside of the US, judging by there recent endevours across the globe. They don't and can't understand the culture of the rest of the world..

I think there track record speaks for itself.

Perhaps you could change my mind by giving examples of there so called insite?

 

[McGyver]

International Agendas are Always Political

-sigh- couldn't it be rather that those "rabid" Americans have a little more insight about the nature of Chavez, and the threat he poses to the entire region? It never ceases to amaze me how easily deluded Left-wing people are... would you indulge me and do a search on Alan Garcia, of whom Chavez is but a clone, and tell me why do you think the experience should be repeated?
We're not automatons here. No lively or wothwhile discussion can ever stay strictly "on topic".

You should not paint members of this list with a wide liberal brush. On an earlier POLITICAL SURVEY - I hit dead center. I am also the author of this thread. I wanted to share this "news story" as it demonstrates how other (sometimes radically viewed) political leaderships has their favorable qualities. The Bush White House has demonized Chavez - yet look at the White House's close ties to Saudia Arabia. Yeah, they are the ones who provided most of the terrorists participants for the 911 attack. One could spend pages comparing Chavez to Bush, but it's not worth the effort at this juncture.
The reality is that the Bush White House has exhausted nearly all of its goodwill capital around the world. The U.S. oil companies had plenty of opportunity, and were even begged to step up with charitable relief - but with the U.S. shift being so far to the Right, they didn't get it! In the end, it was a "foreign company" and White House foe that made the gesture. But, if you look around the world, the Bush White House has a lot of foes.
I regret that I was mistakenly lured into voting for Bush in 2000, in that he had already assembled experieced staff, and was sold as a "unite-er." But, the Bush White House has failed miserably in this role. Diplomacy is invaluable in both foreign and domestic relationships. It was Chavez, here, that rose above Bush to be the "unite-er." As I said earlier, the Bush White House and big U.S. oil really got one-up'd. Perhaps this lesson may lead to U.S. oil companies following suit.
If there were horrific motivations by Chavez, as you claim, I really doubt that the MA governor and representatives, including both Democrats and Republicans, would have brokered such a deal.
Diplomacy is everything in building relationships.
Stephen Dolle
Dolle Communications
www.diaceph.com

 

[ron damon]

Perhaps you could change my mind by giving examples of there so called insite?

The Bush White House has demonized Chavez

Forget about Bush or the US. As far as the region and its interests are concerned, Chavez is a threat. I have already mentioned why, but since no one listened, I'll succinctly re-state that charismatic leaders such as Chavez have repeatedly seized power in almost all Latin American countries, and the results have been invariably disastrous.

These despicable men bribe the poor with Left-wing rhetoric and a mercado, and then rob them of any chance of escaping poverty by severely constraining economic growth, investment, technological change, and job creation through their socialistic policies and extremely corrupt cronyism.

None of them ever fail at enriching themselves though, and leave their countries descending into yet more revolution and poverty. Castro, "Crazy" Bucaram, Alan Garcia, Peron... so many others I don't care to remember.

There was once a man who won the presidency of his country by claiming to be a champion of the poor. He taunted the rich elites, welcomed their insults and promised to end corruption and injustice. During his campaign, he put on a show where he sang, dance and cracked jokes -- usually against the oligarchs.
When he won, he packed groceries into bags with his name and gave them to the poor. He also packed the government with cronies and family members and gave them the treasury. In a few months they plundered up to $100 million.

The above description applies equally well to them all.

It is pathetic how the region keeps making the same mistakes over and over again. But like I said, the mixture of Catholicism and Leftism leaves virtually no room in Latin American culture for the kind of ethics that would lead them to pursue a different path. They love their Chavezes, their Castros, their Perons, and no matter what experience tries to teach them, cannot resist their populist's siren calls...

 

[Anttech]

You quoted me, but didnt show me any insite from the "Rabid(s)"

 

[McGyver]

Demonized Leaders vs. Intelligence vs. Stupidity vs. History

Though it appears that some in the U.S. have tried to demonize Venezuela's Chavez - he remains a source of "Intelligence," as he did one-up the Bush oil machinery. I won't claim to have expert knowledge of all of his reported misgivings and treachery - as some claim.

But, one can measure a leader in many ways. They can be termed a dictator, a humanitarian, a brilliant policy planner, great dreamer, a demon, and even in some cases, an idiot. Often times, you must pick your poisen! But, as a rule, when a chastized individual or leader extends a courtesy or gesture of good will - I'd suggest saying "Thank You."

Germany's Hitler, as history revealed, became a dangerous dictator who came very close to taking over the world. Yet, his leadership and efforts have been unmatched by any notable leader of the last several hundred years. Just allow yourself to wonder, that if Germany hadn't been under so many turmulous years of economic sanctions following WWI, what good and advancements he might have contributed to the world. It was his vision that led to our highways of today, and Germany's technological advancements astounded the world. What I'm trying to point out, is that the entire world, and especially the West, has never accepted any responsibility for its falied "Diplomacy" that led to the rise and actgions of Hitler.

Similarly, the West failed in "Diplomacy" to more wisely address the concerns posed by Saddam Hussein, and he became a demon.

I could go on with a list of many leaders who later became so called demons. But probably in almost each and every case, there was failed Diplomacy that allowed a brilliant and Intelligent leader to turn bad.

When one now examines President Bush, one will find it very difficult to identify instances/proof of his greatness or Intelligence - which leaves me to believe that history will not be kind to him. History may describe him as having much "Stupidity." He may even be demonized. He already has been demonized by many countries around the world.

True leadership is a very complex trait to describe - as there are so many ever changing conditions and events. History seems to be the best judge of true leadership. So I suppose we'll have to wait to read what is eventually written about President's Bush and Chavez.