Hugo Chavez vs. Charles Taylor
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 01:36:23 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  Hugo Chavez vs. Charles Taylor
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Poll
Question: who's worse?
#1
Chavez
 
#2
Taylor
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 26

Author Topic: Hugo Chavez vs. Charles Taylor  (Read 2849 times)
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,701
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: August 23, 2005, 10:53:07 PM »

You can bitch about Chavez all you want, but he doesn't have child soldiers, nor did he back an insurgency in a neighboring country which would assault areas in government controlled territory and cut off the hands of everyone there so they couldn't grow food for the government soldiers, and cut open pregnant women to see the sex of the fetus as a betting game. Chavez's forces have never set up rape rooms or robbed and ravaged the countryside. Taylor did all this.

And yet which one does Pat Robertson call for the assasination of, and which one does Robertson defend and argue the US should help leave in power?

More right wing logic, not too logical.
Logged
Cubby
Pim Fortuyn
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,067
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -3.74, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: August 23, 2005, 11:16:30 PM »

Yea I'm the first vote!  (Taylor)

Back in 2002 before I understood the Venezula situation I supported the opponents of the Chavez Regime, but now I realize that the reason the U.S. (tacitly) backed the coup against him that year was b/c Chavez is a strident left-winger. The opposition movement seems to be lead by disgruntled oil oligarchs who want more money.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,701
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: August 23, 2005, 11:19:22 PM »

In a nutshell. And right wing media barons.

Chavez is the rare world leader who actually cares about the poor of his country. The megacorps can't have that.
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: August 23, 2005, 11:25:50 PM »

Chavez simply because he posses a greater threat to America. Someone as knowledgeble as yourself should be able to easily identify that BRTD.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,701
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: August 23, 2005, 11:27:29 PM »

I judge world leaders on how they treat their own people, not the US. Chavez is not a threat to the US anyway, all he's done is say some nasty things about Bush.
Logged
TeePee4Prez
Flyers2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,480


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: August 24, 2005, 12:12:07 AM »

Chavez simply because he posses a greater threat to America. Someone as knowledgeble as yourself should be able to easily identify that BRTD.

How is Chavez a threat?
Logged
The Duke
JohnD.Ford
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,270


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: -1.23

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: August 24, 2005, 12:17:36 AM »

Taylor is a worse person, Chavez is a greater threat to the US.

And Flyers, anyone who controls a sizeable portion of the world's oil and uses it to fund communist geurillas in Colombia in an attempt to overthrow that goverment is a threat, and anyone who threatens to cut off our oil for God knows what reason is a threat to America.  Now go back to striking out with ugly Democrat girls.
Logged
AuH2O
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,239


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: August 24, 2005, 12:21:58 AM »

Maybe once Uribe is done exterminating FARC he can turn on Chavez. In any case, Taylor is a primitive savage, whereas Chavez merely has his head full of silly ideas-- those ideas not including democracy or basic economic logic.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: August 24, 2005, 12:38:12 AM »

Taylor mainly because he is a religious.
Logged
Joe Republic
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,042
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: August 24, 2005, 04:59:25 AM »

anyone who threatens to cut off our oil for God knows what reason is a threat to America.

Venezuelan oil, or any other country's oil for that matter, doesn't inherently belong to the US.
Logged
Beefalow and the Consumer
Beef
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,123
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.77, S: -8.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: August 24, 2005, 08:36:04 AM »

Taylor is a worse person, Chavez is a greater threat to the US.

And Flyers, anyone who controls a sizeable portion of the world's oil and uses it to fund communist geurillas in Colombia in an attempt to overthrow that goverment is a threat

So he gets his neighbors' despotic right-wing governments overthrown in favor of despotic left-wing governments.  Big deal.  We've spent the past 40 years attempting to overthrow despotic left-wing governments in favor of despotic right-wing governments.  Oh, except when we do it, it's ok, because we're America.  The Monroe Doctrine is right there in Pat Robertson's Bible, next to the passage about right-wing economics being pleasing to God.

This is not a threat to the US.

, and anyone who threatens to cut off our oil for God knows what reason is a threat to America.

Maybe if we didn't keep pretending the Cold War was still on, and stopped mucking around on ideological anti-communist crusades (which are really just about protecting corporate interests in banana republics), Marxists like Chavez wouldn't be so belligerent towards us.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: August 24, 2005, 08:45:26 AM »

Chavez simply because he posses a greater threat to America.
I judge world leaders on how they treat their own people, not the US.
Seldom seen a better summary of the old foreign policy choice of nationalism vs sanity. Tongue
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,701
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: August 24, 2005, 09:40:19 AM »

Taylor mainly because he is a religious.

so is Chavez.
Logged
TeePee4Prez
Flyers2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,480


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: August 24, 2005, 01:41:09 PM »

Taylor is a worse person, Chavez is a greater threat to the US.

And Flyers, anyone who controls a sizeable portion of the world's oil and uses it to fund communist geurillas in Colombia in an attempt to overthrow that goverment is a threat, and anyone who threatens to cut off our oil for God knows what reason is a threat to America.  Now go back to striking out with ugly Democrat girls.

Did you support Pinochet over Allende?
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: August 24, 2005, 03:51:24 PM »

Taylor is a worse person.  And neither is a threat to the US, only a handful of people really are.
Logged
WMS
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,562


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: August 24, 2005, 04:05:33 PM »

Taylor is a worse person, Chavez is a greater threat to the US.

And Flyers, anyone who controls a sizeable portion of the world's oil and uses it to fund communist geurillas in Colombia in an attempt to overthrow that goverment is a threat

So he gets his neighbors' despotic right-wing governments overthrown in favor of despotic left-wing governments.  Big deal.  We've spent the past 40 years attempting to overthrow despotic left-wing governments in favor of despotic right-wing governments.  Oh, except when we do it, it's ok, because we're America.  The Monroe Doctrine is right there in Pat Robertson's Bible, next to the passage about right-wing economics being pleasing to God.

This is not a threat to the US.

Beef old boy, Chavez is explicitly trying to drive the U.S. out of ALL of Latin America, and is interfering in other countries in ways up to and including funding revolutions against democractic governments. And he picked this fight in the first place for God knows what left-wing reason - he was hostile to the U.S. long before we ever did anything to him. And have you forgotten that he initially tried to stage a military coup in Venezuela against a democratic government?

And you are just wrong on Colombia - Uribe is quite popular, was elected democratically, and is fulfilling the wishes of his people, who for the record despise FARC as a pack of criminals who only pay lip service to helping out the poor. The Colombian government is legitimate by any standard. The rebels aren't.
Logged
Beefalow and the Consumer
Beef
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,123
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.77, S: -8.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: August 24, 2005, 04:40:17 PM »


And you are just wrong on Colombia - Uribe is quite popular, was elected democratically, and is fulfilling the wishes of his people, who for the record despise FARC as a pack of criminals who only pay lip service to helping out the poor. The Colombian government is legitimate by any standard. The rebels aren't.

I am not defending Chavez's actions in Colombia.  Simply stating that this is not a threat to the U.S.  It might be a threat to U.S. interests, but even a giant bloc of Communist regimes in Latin America poses no threat to the U.S.  It would be an enormous human tragedy in the region, but no skin off of our nose.

And America's track record of interventions in Latin America leaves us in no position whatsoever to criticize Chavez. 

And why should we be in Latin America to begin with?  As we're no longer the sole democracy in the world, and it's now logistically feasible for other democracies across the world to deploy forces anywhere, the Monroe Docrine no longer has much meaning.  The U.S. should not be playing the role of lone protector of democracy in the Western Hemisphere.  That is now the job of the world community.  AND, even if it were our job to protect democracy, we've completely botched that job up in recent decades, so it's not surprising that the people of Colombia aren't clamoring for our assistence.

Hugo Chavez is not a threat to the U.S.  He is a threat to humanity, just as Charles Taylor is.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,701
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: August 24, 2005, 10:15:14 PM »

Uribe is a bastard who runs death squads and has collaborate with AUC who are even worse than FARC. I'd have no problem with taking him out.

I don't support FARC (while I would still love to have sex with any hot female in their ranks!) as they are basically just a bunch of drug lords now and have abandoned the fight for the poor, but the government and AUC are just as much to blame for the violence there, AUC is the biggest problem, 70% of civilian casualties caused each year in Colombia are their fault. And the government is mostly just looking the other way.
Logged
The Duke
JohnD.Ford
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,270


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: -1.23

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: August 24, 2005, 11:10:09 PM »

anyone who threatens to cut off our oil for God knows what reason is a threat to America.

Venezuelan oil, or any other country's oil for that matter, doesn't inherently belong to the US.

We can play the semantics game if you want, but I'm not that interested.  I don't think there's any doubt what I mean when I said that.

Chavez could wreck this nation's economy by shutting off the oil.  That's an issue that can't be resolved by invoking the case for non-interventionism.

Taylor is a worse person, Chavez is a greater threat to the US.

And Flyers, anyone who controls a sizeable portion of the world's oil and uses it to fund communist geurillas in Colombia in an attempt to overthrow that goverment is a threat

So he gets his neighbors' despotic right-wing governments overthrown in favor of despotic left-wing governments.  Big deal.  We've spent the past 40 years attempting to overthrow despotic left-wing governments in favor of despotic right-wing governments.  Oh, except when we do it, it's ok, because we're America.  The Monroe Doctrine is right there in Pat Robertson's Bible, next to the passage about right-wing economics being pleasing to God.

This is not a threat to the US.

Columbia is a democracy.  It is insulting and ignorant to say that are a "despotic right-wing government".

, and anyone who threatens to cut off our oil for God knows what reason is a threat to America.

Maybe if we didn't keep pretending the Cold War was still on, and stopped mucking around on ideological anti-communist crusades (which are really just about protecting corporate interests in banana republics), Marxists like Chavez wouldn't be so belligerent towards us.

Chavez was belligerent towards the US long before any US action against him.  No one made him threaten to shut off the oil.  No one made him send money to FARC.  No one made him rig an election.  Any suggestion to the contrary is some fantasy that you've cooked up in your head to justify isolationism.

Taylor is a worse person, Chavez is a greater threat to the US.

And Flyers, anyone who controls a sizeable portion of the world's oil and uses it to fund communist geurillas in Colombia in an attempt to overthrow that goverment is a threat, and anyone who threatens to cut off our oil for God knows what reason is a threat to America.  Now go back to striking out with ugly Democrat girls.

Did you support Pinochet over Allende?

I was not alive in 1973 and any comments I could make have the advantage of hindsight.

I do think it was right to overthrow Allende, because his government was on the verge of collapse anyway.  Things would have been much more hectic had we simply stood aside and watched, doing nothing.

I do question whether Pinochet was the proper choice of a leader for Chile, and I certainly question the wisdom of staying with Pinochet as long as we did, especially given how beneficial it ended up being to go with democracy in Chile in the late 1980s when Reagan pulled the plug on Pinochet.


And you are just wrong on Colombia - Uribe is quite popular, was elected democratically, and is fulfilling the wishes of his people, who for the record despise FARC as a pack of criminals who only pay lip service to helping out the poor. The Colombian government is legitimate by any standard. The rebels aren't.

I am not defending Chavez's actions in Colombia.  Simply stating that this is not a threat to the U.S.  It might be a threat to U.S. interests, but even a giant bloc of Communist regimes in Latin America poses no threat to the U.S.  It would be an enormous human tragedy in the region, but no skin off of our nose.

And America's track record of interventions in Latin America leaves us in no position whatsoever to criticize Chavez. 

And why should we be in Latin America to begin with?  As we're no longer the sole democracy in the world, and it's now logistically feasible for other democracies across the world to deploy forces anywhere, the Monroe Docrine no longer has much meaning.  The U.S. should not be playing the role of lone protector of democracy in the Western Hemisphere.  That is now the job of the world community.  AND, even if it were our job to protect democracy, we've completely botched that job up in recent decades, so it's not surprising that the people of Colombia aren't clamoring for our assistence.

Hugo Chavez is not a threat to the U.S.  He is a threat to humanity, just as Charles Taylor is.

A communist takeover of all Latin America is "no skin off our nose"?  Do you have any idea the economic havoc to be wrought by such a thing?  You may or may no support interventions in Latin America, but please don't pretend there aren't consequences to communist takeovers in these countries.

As for our past interventions in Latin America, they've been successful far more often than they have been otherwise.  It's been a long time since we had an intervention that can't be rationally defended.  Panama '89, Haiti '94, Mexcio '94, Grenada '83.  Most of these things worked out very well.

By Mexico '94, I refer to the bailout of Mexico engineered by the Clinton Administration after the Peso crashed.
Logged
Smash255
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,445


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: August 24, 2005, 11:13:56 PM »

Take 1 off Chavez add 1 to Taylor
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,701
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: August 24, 2005, 11:15:55 PM »

Ford since you admitted Taylor is the worse person, then do you agree that Robertson is an idiot hypcortei?
Logged
The Duke
JohnD.Ford
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,270


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: -1.23

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: August 24, 2005, 11:25:46 PM »

Ford since you admitted Taylor is the worse person, then do you agree that Robertson is an idiot hypcortei?

I think Robertson is a bad guy, and we should not pay too much attention to what he says in any area.  But I don't know that he's a hypocrite.  He attacked Chavez for being a threat to America, and he is a greater threat to America than Taylor.  I didn't think he had attacked Chavez simply for being a bad person.
Logged
patrick1
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,865


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: August 24, 2005, 11:41:49 PM »
« Edited: August 24, 2005, 11:49:07 PM by patrick1 »

Both filth, Taylor is filthier. 

Chavez is a horrible danger to the econmic well being of his own people, however, I would not support any assassination attempt.  We should really ease up on the throttle when it comes to rigging the affairs of Latin nations for the business interests- we have far larger and more dangerous fish to fry in the Middle East and environs.  The days of orchestrating coups for the United Fruit Company or perhaps this time Esso should be left to the history books.

That old pinko Smedley Butler USMC catalogued some of the stuff he got under his fingernails:
"I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902–1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested."
Logged
Beefalow and the Consumer
Beef
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,123
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.77, S: -8.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: August 25, 2005, 09:26:19 AM »


Chavez could wreck this nation's economy by shutting off the oil.

That foreign madmen and dictators can pull the strings of our economy is nobody's fault but our own.

Columbia is a democracy.  It is insulting and ignorant to say that are a "despotic right-wing government".

I retract.  But it doesn't change the fact that our horrible track record of intervention makes it impossible to criticize anyone else's.  Furthermore, I don't see the people of Colombia begging for our help, and even furthermore, it should be the job of the world community and/or the Pan-American community, not the US alone, to provide that help.

I do question whether Pinochet was the proper choice of a leader for Chile

Why is it up to The United States of America alone to make the determination of who is and isn't the proper choice of a leader for Chile?  I agree that the people of Chile may have had their right to self-determination taken away, but any restoration should be accomplished by international, multilateral means, not by the US acting unilaterally!  What happens in unilateralism, invariably, is that the interests of the intervening government takes precedence over the interests of the people we are supposedly "helping."  Look at Iraq: whose interests are being served there?

I'm not arguing "isolationism."  I'm arguing multilateralism and internationalism.  You know, those ideals that used to be the centerpiece of Republican foreign policy?  If it is not a direct threat to US security, as in a foreign force being deployed against us, we should be acting through the community of nations, not alone.  Yes, it might have made sense in 1820, but not in 2005.
Logged
PBrunsel
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,537


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: August 25, 2005, 10:30:41 AM »

Rep. Charles Taylor of North Carolina is in no way as bad as Chavez. Wink
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.065 seconds with 13 queries.