US Prepared to Offer Guaido Full Range of Options

[Anler]

Just now, Highmark said:

So absolutely nothing is to blame on the socialistic policies put in place by the Chavez regime? 

Not in this case. Had there been no intervention for the last 15 years we could discuss their issues. But you can't blame "socialism" when there has been non stop fuckery being imposed on them to promote their failure. 

[Zambroski]

4 minutes ago, Anler said:

Not in this case. Had there been no intervention for the last 15 years we could discuss their issues. But you can't blame "socialism" when there has been non stop fuckery being imposed on them to promote their failure. 

I’d really like to read some of this shit you anarchy wanna be half-wits swim around in.  Is it comic book form?

[Anler]

1 minute ago, Zambroski said:

I’d really like to read some of this shit you anarchy wanna be half-wits swim around in.  Is it comic book form?

This is what makes you the stupidest cunt on this site because I have been posting these instances for years! Literally years. Since the old site. Just kill yourself please. 

[Highmark]

23 minutes ago, Anler said:

Not in this case. Had there been no intervention for the last 15 years we could discuss their issues. But you can't blame "socialism" when there has been non stop fuckery being imposed on them to promote their failure. 

Socialism is a breeding ground for corruption.  Look at our most corrupt cities.  

Great article.....even for the NYT's.   Couple key points.   Sorry but we did not make Chavez and his cronies corrupt and that is much of the root of their problems.  

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/14/world/americas/venezuela-collapse-analysis-interpreter.html

Their pact, meant to preserve democracy, came to dominate it. Party elites picked candidates and blocked outsiders, making politics less responsive. The agreement to share wealth fostered corruption.

“He was reducing potential checks on his authority,” said John Carey, a Dartmouth College political scientist. Beneath the revolutionary language, Mr. Carey said, was “pretty savvy institutional engineering.

The strike threatened to destroy the economy and Mr. Chávez’s presidency. But it also presented an opportunity to stave off another uprising.

After the strike collapsed, he fired 18,000 PDVSA workers, many of them skilled technicians and managers, and replaced them with some 100,000 supporters.

Much of the firm’s operating budget was diverted into programs for Mr. Chávez’s political base, payoffs for government cronies and subsidies to keep his promise of affordable food.

In 2011, $500 million from a PDVSA pension fund found its way into a pyramid scheme run by government-linked financiers, none of whom faced prosecution. After running on smashing the corrupt elite, Mr. Chávez had merely established his own.

As an oil company, PDVSA was ruined. Production dropped despite a global boom in oil prices. The injury rate, measured in lost man-hours, more than tripled.

In 2012, a refinery exploded, killing at least 40 and causing $1.7 billion in damage, suggesting that even maintenance budgets had been siphoned.

Its cash reserves depleted and development projects stalled, PDVSA, and by extension the Venezuelan economy, was left without a cushion when oil prices dropped in 2014.

 

President Nicolás Maduro, who took power when Mr. Chávez died in 2013, inherited an economy that was a shambles and tenuous support among elites and the public.

In desperation, he parceled out patronage. The military, with which he had less sway than his predecessor, got control of lucrative drug and food trades, as well as gold mining.

Unable to pay for subsidies and welfare programs, he printed more money. When this drove up inflation, making basic goods unaffordable, he instituted price controls and fixed the currency exchange rate.

This made many imports prohibitively expensive. Businesses shut down. Mr. Maduro printed more money, and inflation grew again. Food became scarce. Unrest deepened, and Mr. Maduro’s survival grew more contingent on handouts he could not afford.

Mr. Chávez had set up Venezuela for not just economic collapse but also a political crisis. If his support relied on oil-fueled patronage, what would happen when the money ran out?

 

Edited May 6, 2019 by Highmark

[Anler]

26 minutes ago, Highmark said:

Socialism is a breeding ground for corruption.  Look at our most corrupt cities.  

Great article.....even for the NYT's.   Couple key points.   Sorry but we did not make Chavez and his cronies corrupt and that is much of the root of their problems.  

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/14/world/americas/venezuela-collapse-analysis-interpreter.html

Their pact, meant to preserve democracy, came to dominate it. Party elites picked candidates and blocked outsiders, making politics less responsive. The agreement to share wealth fostered corruption.

“He was reducing potential checks on his authority,” said John Carey, a Dartmouth College political scientist. Beneath the revolutionary language, Mr. Carey said, was “pretty savvy institutional engineering.

The strike threatened to destroy the economy and Mr. Chávez’s presidency. But it also presented an opportunity to stave off another uprising.

After the strike collapsed, he fired 18,000 PDVSA workers, many of them skilled technicians and managers, and replaced them with some 100,000 supporters.

Much of the firm’s operating budget was diverted into programs for Mr. Chávez’s political base, payoffs for government cronies and subsidies to keep his promise of affordable food.

In 2011, $500 million from a PDVSA pension fund found its way into a pyramid scheme run by government-linked financiers, none of whom faced prosecution. After running on smashing the corrupt elite, Mr. Chávez had merely established his own.

As an oil company, PDVSA was ruined. Production dropped despite a global boom in oil prices. The injury rate, measured in lost man-hours, more than tripled.

In 2012, a refinery exploded, killing at least 40 and causing $1.7 billion in damage, suggesting that even maintenance budgets had been siphoned.

Its cash reserves depleted and development projects stalled, PDVSA, and by extension the Venezuelan economy, was left without a cushion when oil prices dropped in 2014.

 

President Nicolás Maduro, who took power when Mr. Chávez died in 2013, inherited an economy that was a shambles and tenuous support among elites and the public.

In desperation, he parceled out patronage. The military, with which he had less sway than his predecessor, got control of lucrative drug and food trades, as well as gold mining.

Unable to pay for subsidies and welfare programs, he printed more money. When this drove up inflation, making basic goods unaffordable, he instituted price controls and fixed the currency exchange rate.

This made many imports prohibitively expensive. Businesses shut down. Mr. Maduro printed more money, and inflation grew again. Food became scarce. Unrest deepened, and Mr. Maduro’s survival grew more contingent on handouts he could not afford.

Mr. Chávez had set up Venezuela for not just economic collapse but also a political crisis. If his support relied on oil-fueled patronage, what would happen when the money ran out?

 

United States is a socialist country also. Probably more so than Venezuela. They just nationalized their oil where we let private companies own our resources. 

[Zambroski]

50 minutes ago, Anler said:

This is what makes you the stupidest cunt on this site because I have been posting these instances for years! Literally years. Since the old site. Just kill yourself please. 

Yeah, I’ve read some but never really made it past the intro.  Kinda like JT’s flat earth links.

[Highmark]

19 minutes ago, Anler said:

United States is a socialist country also. Probably more so than Venezuela. They just nationalized their oil where we let private companies own our resources. 

"Our resources?"   What are all "our resources?"   Is this just minerals or does it include everything from underground up to and including the soil?

You do realize a significant portion of oil and gas production comes from private lands?   Federal oil royalties are around 12.5% plus they pay income taxes.    

While I don't disagree we are far more socialist than I would like we are far from Venezuela.  

Edited May 6, 2019 by Highmark

[Anler]

4 minutes ago, Highmark said:

"Our resources?"   What are all "our resources?"   Is this just minerals or does it include everything from underground up to and including the soil?

You do realize a significant portion of oil and gas production comes from private lands?   Federal oil royalties are around 12.5% plus they pay income taxes.    

While I don't disagree we are far more socialist than I would like we are far from Venezuela.  

Sure I "realize" all of that but not every country does that. Many countries use revenues from oil extraction to fund govt. Canada even has a private/public partnership when it comes to their oil reserves. But whatever they do it's really none of our business. Odd how you support our intervention in all of these places. 

[Highmark]

Just now, Anler said:

Sure I "realize" all of that but not every country does that. Many countries use revenues from oil extraction to fund govt. Canada even has a private/public partnership when it comes to their oil reserves. But whatever they do it's really none of our business. Odd how you support our intervention in all of these places. 

Support intervention where? 

[Anler]

Just now, Highmark said:

Support intervention where? 

You've been defending it this entire thread.

[Highmark]

5 minutes ago, Anler said:

You've been defending it this entire thread.

  Sorry dude but pointing partial blame in the correct direction is not defending.    

[Zambroski]

54 minutes ago, Highmark said:

  Sorry dude but pointing partial blame in the correct direction is not defending.    

You are an admirable and patient educator.  Your students are just retards.

 

[xtralettucetomatoe580]

56 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

You are an admirable and patient educator.  Your students are just retards.

 

Ur

[Anler]

Here is what a conservative sounds like. As per usual the whole piece is bang on. 

 

A Nuclear War? Over Venezuela?

written by ron paul

monday may 6, 2019

Is President Trump about to invade Venezuela? His advisors keep telling us in ever-stronger terms that “all options are on the table” and that US military intervention to restore Venezuela’s constitution “may be necessary.” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was on the Sunday news programs to claim that President Trump could launch a military attack against Venezuela without Congress’s approval.

Pompeo said that, "[t]he president has his full range of Article II authorities and I'm very confident that any action we took in Venezuela would be lawful." The man who bragged recently about his lying, cheating, and stealing, is giving plenty of evidence to back his claim.

The president has no Constitutional authority to start a war with Venezuela or any other country that has not attacked or credibly threatened the United States without Congressional approval. It is that simple.

How ironic that Pompeo and the rest of the neocons in the Trump Administration are ready to attack Venezuela to “restore their constitution” but they could not care less about our own Constitution!

While Washington has been paralyzed for two years over disproven claims that the Russians meddled in our elections to elect Trump, how hypocritical that Washington does not even hesitate to endorse the actual overturning of elections overseas!

Without Congressional authority, US military action of any kind against Venezuela would be an illegal and likely an impeachable offense. Of course those Democrats who talk endlessly of impeaching Trump would never dream of impeaching him over starting an illegal war. Democrats and Republicans both love illegal US wars.

Unfortunately, Washington is so addicted to war that President Trump would likely have little difficulty getting authority from Congress to invade Venezuela if he bothered to ask. Just as with the disastrous US invasion of Iraq in 2003, the mainstream media is nothing but non-stop war propaganda. Even so-called progressives like Rachel Maddow are attacking the Trump Administration not for its reckless saber-rattling toward Venezuela but for not being aggressive enough!

The real lesson is that even a “Constitutional” war against Venezuela would not be a just war. It would be a war of aggression for which Americans should be angry and ashamed. But the mainstream media is pumping out the same old pro-war lies, while the independent media is under attack from social media companies that have partnered with US government entities to decide what is “fake news.”

The latest outrage in the mainstream media is over the most sensible thing President Trump has done in some time: last week he spent an hour on the telephone with Russian President Vladimir Putin to discuss, among other things, the dangerous situation in Venezuela.

While President Trump’s neocon advisors are purposely trying to position him so that war is the only option, we can only hope that President Putin was able to explain that the Venezuela problem must be solved by the Venezuelans themselves. Certainly the US, perhaps together with the Russians, could help facilitate discussions between the government and the opposition, but the neocon road to war will surely end up like all the other neocon wars: total disaster.

The media is furious that Trump dared to speak to Putin as the two countries increasingly face-off over Venezuela. The Democrats and neocons are pushing for a direct confrontation that may even involve Russia. Republicans agree. Do they really prefer thermonuclear war? Over Venezuela?

[Jimmy Snacks]

Good post...will be ignored and go over most heads around here.

[xtralettucetomatoe580]

Ron Paul just

the DC cess pool. 

[f7ben]

Ron Paul was the best candidate to run in my life time for sure. Of course he didnt lick boots and jesus hard enough for the fucking retards around here.

[steve from amherst]

6 minutes ago, f7ben said:

Ron Paul was the best candidate to run in my life time for sure. Of course he didnt lick boots and jesus hard enough for the fucking retards around here.

Yep , only pres candidate I ever gave money to. And the only one in a long time I voted for and not used my vote to vote against someone.

[Zambroski]

15 minutes ago, f7ben said:

Ron Paul was the best candidate to run in my life time for sure. Of course he didnt lick boots and jesus hard enough for the fucking retards around here.

But look who his fan base is.  Eewww. 

[f7ben]

4 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

But look who his fan base is.  Eewww. 

Right.....I can see how people who can think critically would disgust you.

[f7ben]

14 minutes ago, steve from amherst said:

Yep , only pres candidate I ever gave money to. And the only one in a long time I voted for and not used my vote to vote against someone.

I gave to Sanders.......that was before he sold out. I would not make that mistake again

[Zambroski]

1 minute ago, f7ben said:

Right.....I can see how people who can think critically would disgust you.

No they don't.  I don't even find the people that believe that they are critical thinkers but really, are not, disgusting.  I find them entertaining!

 

[Angry ginger]

2 hours ago, f7ben said:

Ron Paul was the best candidate to run in my life time for sure. Of course he didnt lick boots and jesus hard enough for the fucking retards around here.

wrong

ross perot

[f7ben]

6 minutes ago, Angry ginger said:

wrong

ross perot

Well....I'll give you that he was good. Better than Ron? Who knows....completely different issues at the time.

[steve from amherst]

were either of you 2 old enough to vote in 92 ?