Tuesday, December 05, 2006

Who Is The Enemy?

Glenn Greenwald again makes a logical point of something the rest of us have long been trying to point out to wingnuttia.

Hugo Chavez was overwhelmingly re-elected yesterday as Venezuela's President. Opposition to the United States played a significant role in his successful campaign, as he promised "a more radical version of socialism and [to] forge a wider front against the United States in Latin America."Over the last two years, the Palestinians democratically elected Hamas leaders. The Lebanese have democratically elected Hezbollah to play a major role in their parliamentary government. The Iranian-allied militias in Iraq are led by factions with substantial representation in the democratically elected Iraqi Government. And the Iranian Hitler himself was democratically elected (just like Hitler the First was, long before the parade of all the new Hitlers). If the leaders whom we are supposed to hate so much -- even the ones who are The Terrorists -- keep getting elected democratically, doesn't that negate the ostensible premise of our foreign policy -- that America-loving allies will magically spring up all over the world where there are democracies and they will help us fight The Terrorists?........ As this Bush follower lamented after complaining about Chavez's victory (h/t Instapundit): It seems to be a popular move this year to run an Anti-Bush, anti-US military campaign. It worked for the democrats, too. Good Luck...........(Those) changing other countries' governments at will, and invading whomever we want shouldn't really be that surprised when anti-American sentiment is a potent electoral tool. Independently, engaging in such resentment-producing behavior might also worsen what the President himself says is the reason the 9/11 attacks happened: "anger and resentment grew, radicalism thrived, and terrorists found willing recruits." Perhaps we can soon come to the realization that it may not be such a good idea for a country which is intensely disliked by much of the world's population on every continent to urge that leaders be chosen democratically, since, by definition, that will likely produce leaders who are hostile rather than friendly to the U.S. And if spreading democracy is going to be our central goal, then maybe it does matter after all what the rest of the world thinks, since that is what will determine who the leaders are of other countries.
The idea that the right has any ability at all to fight terror effectively should have been fully debunked by now. These elections are symbolic attacks on America. Thank God most don't yet feel threatened enough to take up arms. We desperately need to turn this around. It is a blantantly obvious failed policy. Unfortunately with just 2 years left there will not be enough time for forgiveness. Our hope is that we can show the world with the next election that our intent is not that of the neo con cabal. The full post is here.


Blogger Dedanna said...

Hugo Chavez was overwhelmingly elected? I don't think so. I think he out and out took that election, and not by vote count.

8:29 AM, December 05, 2006  
Blogger Ron said...

You are the first I have heard say that it wasn't a legitimate election. I have no idea but whatever the case he got 60 some percent of the vote. Not that I am defending him..or not. Just that it proves the point of this post.

9:48 AM, December 05, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I can't find the site now but did read that even Rosales' aides said that the election was largely without fault. There was somewhere that the military reopened polling places after many Chavez supporters showed up, but not sure if this happened or what the details are.

Hereis an analysis of the election, before the final results, and an analysis of Latin America.

Chavez is of course a politician which is not necessarily something one way or another. He may have ulterior motives but the same could be said of others including our own leaders. His administration has done things to help people in Venezuela just as the other Latin American leaders have done to various extents. The sum total of these would be their opposition to global corporatism and neoliberal policies. The anti-American part, actually, anti-U.S. Administration(s), comes from U.S. policies toward the region. While no system is perfect and none are any better than the people who make them up, at least Efforts have been made to recognize and address social injustice.

Chavez should "tone it down" on the military revolutionary image, although this probably helps his sellability in getting elected in Venezuela, just as selling takes place in other nations' elections including our own. He and his administration need to be watched on their actions and to make sure they deliver on their promises as anywhere.
Venezuela is also a member of OPEC. Also, Chavez and Venezuela have some connection in the ownership of Smartmatic which owns Seqouia, the voting software company, and all in turn are owned by a holding group Citco which has some "old" Central European connections.

People all over the world need to support opposition to social injustice while keeping an eye on their "leaders" and not be led to simply be for or against a particular nation. Global corporatism is not bound by nations.

Larry in New Mexico

1:09 PM, December 05, 2006  
Blogger Dedanna said...

The Iraq Study Group Report (pdf; direct download), in its entirety (1.72 Mbs)

I don't think they're saying anything we haven't known for ages.

9:32 AM, December 06, 2006  
Blogger Ron said...

Larry, I think much of Chavez is in a serious dislike and distrust of Bush. He in that way is much like the rest of the world. I have little doubt that if we become the country we use to be we will have far fewer enemies which is essentially what this post addressed.

Dedanna, They need a mideast peace conference and meet them face to face. Say, you don't want us here, what is your plan. Then put something together. Sure it's not quite that easy but they will solve it to their satisfaction. It will never be to their satisfaction if it is a solution that we dictate. That is endless war. And you can't really blame them for wanting to control their own destiny. I know the right whines about breeding terrorists bla bla bla. You know what we are doing now is breeding them faster than anytime in history. Something radically different is called for.

3:43 PM, December 07, 2006  
Blogger Dedanna said...


9:07 AM, December 08, 2006  
Blogger Dedanna said...

With a new Coffee Table posting needed, I'm posting this here:

Ron, you need to see this.

9:40 AM, December 08, 2006  
Blogger Ron said...

Dedanna, try doing the link again.

10:21 PM, December 08, 2006  
Blogger Dedanna said...

Sorry, some keys on this keyboard aren't working right now -- need a new one.

here, hopeflly, is a correction...

11:19 AM, December 09, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You have to remember that in Texas the State Government provides realitively little and much is left to local governments. One example is the Texas State Government still provides less than 40% funding for public schools, one of the lowest in the nation. Even the new boost in school funding from the State Government comes at the expense of cuts in other State Government programs.

Same with the Texas Tax Structure. Much is made of the fact that Texas does not have an income tax, so State Taxes are low. But local taxes are very high because of Property Taxes. In fact, one of the reasons for the increase in State School Funding was to lower local property taxes. Yet, it is already being noted that this will be only a temporary fix for a few years as local school districts will again need to raise their tax rates back to the maximum level, and there will still be the cuts and lack of funding for other State Programs in place.

Most immigrants, but not all, in Texas are in low paying jobs with little or no benefits. Whether legal or not, if it wasn't for these immigrants the Texas budget would be even more out of line and the cost of living locally would be much higher even if local government expenses were less. But this is what you get with Texas style governance, something many of us knew personally for decades, and in the last decade the rest of the nation And world have come to find out.

Larry in New Mexico

4:36 PM, December 09, 2006  
Blogger Ron said...

Sooooo basically what they are saying is they are collecting a large amount of money illegally obtained. They will happily take your dirty money. The same money or perhaps more in many cases would be their if there was an American doing the job. When I was young construction jobs were some of the most highly sought after jobs in the country because of the great pay. People knew working at Iowa Beef Packers was a dirty nasty job but they were compensated for it so many made good livings doing it. Many people working at walmart now in some small Iowa towns would have been working at IBP with a health plan et al if it wouldn't have been for corporate greed. This doesn't justify turning our economy upside down.

12:09 PM, December 10, 2006  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home