Venezuela's Maduro says Trump administration wants to have him killed

[Kiwiken]

15 hours ago, ezzra said:

What assassination? well executed accidental death that will benefits millions of people who are on the brink of starvation and disaster, and if one ignorant person has to go before his time for the the betterment and good of millions than so be it...

Too often assassination or military Coups ending in deaths of Leaders are backed by the bigger powers. Do they never think as they use it as a legitimate way to get rid of thorns in their sides . That others may consider your leaders targets too?

A Nations people should decide not external players. If this was allowed we would not have the ongoing problems in Africa and the Middle East

[canuckamuck]

7 hours ago, watcharacters said:

 

What's wrong with that?     

It depends on whether or not there is a better way. I am on the fence here. Maduro is bad obviously, the people need help, but it is impossible to know if the help they get will be freedom or a different type of oppression. There can be no doubt that Venezuela is very attractive as a colony. Foreign powers, including the US, are obviously licking their chops over it. Will the help be better than the current situation in the long term. It is obvious that no one is going to bail them out without taking something priceless in return.

[Scott]

A post with false information has been removed.

[Bluespunk]

*Deleted post edited out*

 

I’ve no time for trump, but Maduro is an inept incompetent excuse of a leader. 

 

His actions are destroying his country. 

 

No one murdered chavez, he just died, like we all will. 

[billd766]

13 hours ago, Jingthing said:

What has Ukraine got to do with Russia?

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

 

The Ukraine used to be a client state of Russia and includes a great many Russians still living there.

 

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

 

In 1991 Ukraine gained its independence from the Soviet Union in the aftermath of its dissolution at the end of the Cold War.

 

The country is home to a multi-ethnic population, 77.8 percent of whom are Ukrainians, followed by a very large Russian minority, as well as Georgians, Romanians, Belarusians, Crimean Tatars, Bulgarians and Hungarians.

 

Venezuela was never a state or anything to do with the USA. 

 

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

 

The territory now known as Venezuela was colonized by Spain in 1522 amid resistance from indigenous peoples. In 1811, it became one of the first Spanish-American territories to declare independence, which was not securely established until 1821, when Venezuela was a department of the federal republic of Gran Colombia. It gained full independence as a country in 1830

[billd766]

13 hours ago, Jingthing said:

They want him out. Their hands are tied. Duh.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

I am not sure who 'they" are.

 

If you mean the USA I will repeat my question.

 

Who or what gives the USA the right to change the regime in ANY country?
 
It is for the people of Venezuela in this case to decide, not some tin pot dictator sitting in the White House.

[billd766]

12 hours ago, underlordcthulhu said:

I'm sick and tired of the US sticking it's nose where it doesn't belong. We're not the world's police.

Many countries and peoples in the world have the same opinion.

[Jingthing]

People need to separate their totally justified opposition to "trump" and their knee jerk general anti-Americanism from the issue at hand -- Maduro. He's got to go and there is no way to get him out peacefully. Ever. 

[billd766]

13 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

People need to separate their totally justified opposition to "trump" and their knee jerk general anti-Americanism from the issue at hand -- Maduro. He's got to go and there is no way to get him out peacefully. Ever. 

 

Who says that Maduro has to go? You, Trump, the American people, the Chinese, aliens from outer space? Who? And when you can tell me that then please tell me why and on whose authority.

[ExpatOilWorker]

On 10/12/2018 at 12:15 PM, billd766 said:

The USA sticking its unwanted nose into other countries affairs once again. They didn't like the last President, Hugo Chavez either.

 

I was working in Caracas in 1992 and was caught up in the second revolution that year. The USA supported Perez when he was President until he was kicked out for corruption.

 

I liked what I saw of the country and I liked the people too.

What you saw and liked in 1992 is now all gone, Thanks to Hugo and Maduro.

 

We might have crossed paths, I was also in Venezuela for 2 years in the 1990'.

[Morch]

17 hours ago, billd766 said:

Who gives the USA the right to change the regime in ANY country?

 

It is for the people of Venezuela in this case to decide, not some tin pot dictator sitting in the White House.

 

Funny how some posters alternate between expecting the US to keep it's nose out of international affairs on some topics, and complaining when it refrains from being involved on other matters.

 

Edited October 13, 2018 by Morch

[Jingthing]

46 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Funny how some posters alternate between expecting the US to keep it's nose out of international affairs on some topics, and complaining when it refrains from being involved on other matters.

 

Yes, the right and the left are both probably guilty of this. I am more of the left but I consider Maduro an extreme case of a dictator that needs to be removed and I also do consider that the USA has special interests in such a close neighbor. I don't really want the USA to explicitly off the guy. That would cause unnecessary blowback. But in the real world there are domestic forces that want him gone too. He will never be removed by fair election. So it's force or nothing. Morality is complex. For people that say just let him be I personally find that less moral than supporting forces that want to take action. 

Edited October 13, 2018 by Jingthing

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Yes, the right and the left are both probably guilty of this. I am more of the left but I consider Maduro an extreme case of a dictator that needs to be removed and I also do consider that the USA has special interests in such a close neighbor. I don't really want the USA to explicitly off the guy. They would cause unnecessary blowback. But in the real world there are domestic forces that want him gone too. He will never be removed by fair election. So it's force or nothing. Morality is complex. For people that say just let him be I personally find that less moral than supporting forces that want to take action. 

 

I'll just say this, without having much of a strong opinion on specifics - US support for local elements' bids to affect regime change doesn't have a history of always ending well. They have a tendency of turning into quagmires. Then again, independently offing the guy doesn't guarantee much either, but perhaps less issues if it can be kept covert (good luck with that, in this day and age).

 

All things considered, so far as the country doesn't export its issues, and doesn't disrupt world affairs too much, and doesn't represent a direct threat, the US can afford to wait him out.

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

I'll just say this, without having much of a strong opinion on specifics - US support for local elements' bids to affect regime change doesn't have a history of always ending well. They have a tendency of turning into quagmires. Then again, independently offing the guy doesn't guarantee much either, but perhaps less issues if it can be kept covert (good luck with that, in this day and age).

 

All things considered, so far as the country doesn't export its issues, and doesn't disrupt world affairs too much, and doesn't represent a direct threat, the US can afford to wait him out.

I think the USA does have an interest in Latin America not getting more destabilized by the mess he's causing. But I agree about the history of these good intention actions often creating even worse outcomes. 

[Morch]

11 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I think the USA does have an interest in Latin America not getting more destabilized by the mess he's causing. But I agree about the history of these good intention actions often creating even worse outcomes. 

 

 

[billd766]

3 hours ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

What you saw and liked in 1992 is now all gone, Thanks to Hugo and Maduro.

 

We might have crossed paths, I was also in Venezuela for 2 years in the 1990'.

 

I was building the cellular network in 1992 for 8 months and had a great time. The bit I didn't like was being on the rooftops working and seeing the smog build up during the day. Even back then some cell sites had armed guards while we were working. One night 2 tams went to a job and were were locked in to work until the morning.

 

Nothing stays the same for very long. More I think the fault of Chavez as Maduro inherited the country and it was a mess and broke then.

[canuckamuck]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

I think the USA does have an interest in Latin America not getting more destabilized by the mess he's causing. But I agree about the history of these good intention actions often creating even worse outcomes. 

America's history of being a stabilizing influence in the last couple of decades is so bad you have to assume they do it on purpose and destabilization is the actual goal. In fact the main difference between 1990 and 2018 is instability and polarization worldwide, the tech revolution, and the massive shift to the left. I am not putting all of this on the USA, Europe crapped it's own bed. But everyone is offended and on the edge and eventually someone is going to direct this rage for their own purposes.. 

[farcanell]

3 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Funny how some posters alternate between expecting the US to keep it's nose out of international affairs on some topics, and complaining when it refrains from being involved on other matters.

 

I’m pretty sure most posters want the US to participate fully in international affairs ( obviously there are exceptions to the rule)... but this “want”, should not be confused with permission to act unilaterally, in our name ( by association) but rather, should manifest itself as a part of a unified effort, amongst its allies

 

a unilateral action, is something that can be expected from a rogue nation.

 

a responsible action, is in consultation with partners, just as you would expect in everyday business dealings.... ( ok... that’s simplistic... but I’m sure you understand my meaning)

 

So.... please petition your government to act transparently, and in conjunction with your allies, and we will love you again... we will trust you again... we will vocally support you again... I promise ????

 

[Morch]

12 hours ago, farcanell said:

I’m pretty sure most posters want the US to participate fully in international affairs ( obviously there are exceptions to the rule)... but this “want”, should not be confused with permission to act unilaterally, in our name ( by association) but rather, should manifest itself as a part of a unified effort, amongst its allies

 

a unilateral action, is something that can be expected from a rogue nation.

 

a responsible action, is in consultation with partners, just as you would expect in everyday business dealings.... ( ok... that’s simplistic... but I’m sure you understand my meaning)

 

So.... please petition your government to act transparently, and in conjunction with your allies, and we will love you again... we will trust you again... we will vocally support you again... I promise ????

 

 

It's not that I have much disagreement with the above notion (even if it paints a somewhat idealized version with regard to how international relations work, and find the "rogue" bit over the top), but when it comes to the assertion regarding "most posters" - well now....

 

Most comments on related topics are nowhere as nuanced or balanced as suggested.

Edited October 14, 2018 by Morch

[farcanell]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

It's not that I have much disagreement with the above notion (even if it paints a somewhat idealized version with regard to how international relations work, and find the "rogue" bit over the top), but when it comes to the assertion regarding "most posters" - well now....

 

Most comments on related topics are nowhere as nuanced or balanced as suggested.

Lol

rose tinted glasses.

an over statement. (or two)

And a glass half full mentality.

but wouldn’t it be great?

????

(I see you Morch... I meant by me)

Edited October 14, 2018 by farcanell