Chavez and Ahmadinejad have joined forces and agreed to create a 2 billion dollar fund that will be used to bankroll investment projects not only in their respective countries but in any 'friendly' third world country that is trying to break away from what they consider U.S. domination. In other words, any anti-U.S. country willing to contract with the devil.In a press conference in Caracas on Saturday, Chavez said, "It will permit us to underpin investments ... above all in those countries whose governments are making efforts to liberate themselves from the (U.S.) imperialist yoke."
Venezuela was Ahmadinejad's first stop on his tour of all the leftist leaning countries in Latin America. (Note: leftist leaning only!)
I find this unholy alliance terribly interesting and rather disturbing, because they represent the 2 major threats of the 21st century. And take note of the countries they want to aid: Africa and Latin America. How close is Africa to the Middle East and Latin America to the U.S.? In other words, they are replacing what they consider U.S global domination and imperialism with their own form of imperialism.
Stay tuned for a post exploring the true imperialists of the world: Muslim extremists and Communists.
12 comments:
I believe that you might like to pass along
our Reality Weblog. It's
concise, informative and supportive
of the efforts to confront Global Jihad.
Comments are welcomed. reb
www.lazyonebenn.blogspot.com
This post gave to me laugh.
1) Chavez is not communist. In Venezuela there is private property and freedom of worship. What exists is a capitalist system, with major preeminence of the State. Probably it is a kind of " Tropical New Deal "-
2) The only imperialism that exists is the corporate imperialism. And this corporate imperialism takes as a tool the government of The United States and your armed forces.
3) The maximum threat for the world is Neither Chávez nor Iran. The maximum threat is the imperialism about which I speak in the point 2).
At some time did Americans detain to think for what sound hated?
If Norway, Sweden, Canada, Belgium, Holland, etc., they are capitalist countries, why nobody hates to these countries, and yes to States Undidos?
Is it necessary that The United States assumes the role of " policeman of the world "?
Probably have to understand that the government of The United States (Bush or any other one) governs inside The United States, but he is not the president of the world, and that every country is free to adopt the political system that wants.
Bush and his allies say that after 11-S, The United States has right to chase the terrorists in the place of the world where they are.
With this reason they invaded Afghanistan.
Following this criterion, has Granada right to invade The United States in search of whom they decided his invasion?
Panama also?
The United States is not any more not less than Granada or Panama. It is equal to these countries. With the same rights and obligations.
The day that they understand this, they will stop being a country that he promotes indirectly the terrorists who then attack them.
I am going to recommend to you a book: Confessions of an Economic Hit Man ", of John Perkins.
The book is available in Amazon for only 12 dollars.
After reading it, you will understand what happens, beyond the toxic machinery of Fox News and CNN.
If you are interested in the topic, it enters to www.johnperkins.org
Regards, in spite of our differences.
Will definitely check out your blog, Snakehunters.
thanks Truman!
Unfortunately, we have people like Daniel who just live in blissful ignorance thinking that both those "ninnies" (as you say) and what they represent are no threats. Total denial. They'll be in for a major surprise in the next decade or so.
Oh well!
I disagree that Chavez is a real threat. It is a known fact that Chavez sells his petrol to the US and that the US is supporting his pipeline-through-the-amazon project (even though it has considerable environmental impacts that are being sidelined because the need for cheap gas is greater).
Furthermore, if Chavez were that much of a threat, their last coup attempt would not have fallen through, it was in fact nothing but a severe warning. The US would have the power to get rid of Chavez if need be.
Finally, Chavez is no communist. Like many greats before him, Peron, Cardenas, Garcia, he is a populist.
Kfkak said:
"Furthermore, if Chavez were that much of a threat, their last coup attempt would not have fallen through, it was in fact nothing but a severe warning. The US would have the power to get rid of Chavez if need be".
I ask:
What right has The United States of getting rid of a foreign government?
If to any country of the world he does not like the government of Bush, can he get rid of him?
I want that someone answers this question, please.
Hello KfKAK,
Yes, of course, he sells his oil to the U.S. (Citgos), but that doesn't mean that won't change. The irony is that these leftist countries hate the U.S. but love our money. My parents lived in Cuba, for several years, in the 80s. I had a chance to visit. Anyone in the diplomatic corps had to pay for their 'help' (gardeners etc.) in U.S. $. Those people in turn had to hand over those dollars to the Cuban govt and were paid in pesos.
And no Chavez isn't claiming he's a communist. Yet! But just wait. He's actually a democratic socialist but with his recent decision to start nationalizing power and telecommunications companies. What does that tell you? He also wants to change the constitution so he can be re-elected ad-infinitum, that places him firmly in the 'dictator' arena. If you have been reading the news recently he is heading straight toward socialism. And this from his own mouth. That's how Castro started out. He fought his revolution as a Socialist and when he was firmly in power revealed himself as a Communist. He gained power through deceit. I wonder if the people would have agreed to support him had they known what they would wind up with. Sure, free education and health care, but they live in great poverty and fear. I was there, I will vouch for that. They have nothing. Education and health care don't feed people.
Problem with liberals is they fail to see the larger picture. The fail to look past what is happening to them at the moment.
Peace.
Daniel,
KFKAK's statement was merely rhetorical, I guarantee you. She wasn't claiming that anyone has the right to get rid of any foreign government. She's one of you. She admires Chavez and your Peron.
But I ask you,Daniel, why is Chavez trying very hard to influence all the people in Latin America to turn socialist? If the government happens to be democratic, is that not some form of trying to get rid of a foreign government? If you need me to translate this into Spanish, I will.
Daniel,
I've already written a post about those delusional people who believe in a 9/11 Conspiracy, so I'm not going to even bother to respond to that comment. You can read what I have to say about that in the post.
And if you look back over history, Communists and Islam have tried to conquer half the world. That's what imperialism is.
What threat does "Corporate Imperialism" ( as you call it) have, globally?
As far as being the policemen of the world. Why do you think Somalia is asking us to help them now? Why did Bosnia ask for our help? If no-one else is going to help those in need, why shouldn't we? Isolationism of the U.S. in the 30s and 40s caused many Jews and others to be murdered by Hitler. Had we gone there earlier we would have saved many lives. same thing with the situation in Bosnia.
And when we talk of terrorists: fanatics who will kill thousands of people, without conscience, because they don't believe in Mohammad, you damn right we have the right to seek them out, wherever they happen to be. Especially if they kill them on our land. And it's just silly to even compare that with Granada or Panama.
But you have your right to your opinion. That is the basis of democracy, which I will take over socialism or any other political system, any day.
good year
Unlike what you have claimed, Incognito, I do not support Hugo Chavez. I believe much of the world is fascinated by him for his anti-US front and are blind-sighted by the reality of his government. I believe he is quite a character, says what people want to hear, and is playing a role. When push comes to shove, he uses the US as need be, like all other countries in the world.
I have also been to Cuba. While the ideals of communism are perfect on paper, the reality is that there a few countries in this world that are worse to live in than Cuba. We here have free healthcare and almost free education, in a democratic and liberal country.
As for Daniel, the US has no right to go into any country. That, however, does not stop them from doing it. What does having the right to do it or not have to do with actually doing it? Has history taught us nothing?
Post a Comment