bitmask, is Venezuela another Mexican standoff?

[Dear Mami]

You are desperate appealing to authority.

For the umpteenth time show me what sanctions has US placed. Quoting someone who you are regurgitating is not smart.

Sanctions are easy to list. I gave you my list, and none of those affect Venezuela as a country, just individuals affiliated with Maduro and officials of Supreme Court which sent elected officials packing. INDIVIDUALS. Show me these other imaginary sanctions by the former rappateur

It's the freaking report presented to the UN after an authorised investigation: call that "appeal to authority" all you want: all you're doing is demonstrating you haven't the foggiest notion what "appeal to authority" even means. Have the US or these banks he cites on the report or anyone involved denied those FACTS cited in the report about those banks that froze Venezuelan cash? The list has been cited at 6.17 by the rapporteur on the clip you refuse to listen to and are in the report itself linked in the article you didn't read, so I'm not doing it for you. Apparently you think Rapporteurs go around making up facts about banks and presenting them to UN bodies and that said institutions (and their govt) simply choose to let those facts float around unchallenged. More fairy tales.

[Dear Mami]

You are desperate appealing to authority.

By the way, so what if I do, anyhow? I'm no expert, and I'm pretty sure you aren't either. We can't know everything about the world and we're not talking about logic but factual things: reliance on more than your reason will be required unless you're doing your own investigations. It's perfectly legitimate to choose to place faith in people who have followed the politics of U.S. foreign policy for decades and the Venezuelan situation for years. At least I know enough not to believe in simplistic ideas like "purely humanitarian" interests by a power that has consistently shown anything but in its foreign interventions. Yes, I learn from guys like these, and I see no downside to it:

Now I'm doubting even the notion that socialism itself caused the economic crisis. It seems they were never fully socialist and everyone agrees the Chaves years were not only excellent, they saved Venezuela from a history of abuse by oligarchs that saw millions suffer year after year. Their fatal mistake was simply failing to divest and save for a rainy day during their years of opulence, so when the prices fell they were caught flat-footed. If they had done that (divest and saved some) would we think socialism caused their crisis? Either way, as that Rapporteur and Chomsky say, they still would've pulled through the crises and resolved their problems if the West hadn't launched their economic warfare.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

This is shorter clip featuring Chomsky, another "conspiracy theorist". By the way, he's no apologist for Maduro, just a balanced observer. He makes the same point made by the Rapporteur: the U.S. and allies have been preventing Venezuelan recovery efforts, deliberately turning an economic crisis into a humanitarian one so they can effect regime change, their long-held goal for Venezuela.

I remember decades ago when you could watch Chomsky on TV.  Then only C-SPAN.  Then it became rare to see him on C-SPAN except at ungodly hours.  You'd be lucky to have seen anything by him(or similar thinkers) on mainstream TV at any hour over the last decade or so.  If you rely on US mainstream media for your news, most of his ideas will seem like from another universe. 

It's amazing how you can have countless media channels in a country of over 300 million people, conspiracy nuts like Hannity, Tucker Carlson, even Alex Jones, and not one single voice ever gets to that platform that says maybe this whole idea of America being infallible is a little whacky.

[Dear Mami]

maybe this whole idea of America being infallible is a little whacky.

It's a mini/pseudoreligion, I swear. All Chomsky does is treat Americans like they are regular people rather than a collection of saints going around the world destroying countries for goody-two-shoes sentimental reasons. Sam Harris, the so-called antireligionist is a fervent adherent of this, "We're the good guys and "they" are very bad" dogma.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

maybe this whole idea of America being infallible is a little whacky.

It's a mini/pseudoreligion, I swear. All Chomsky does is treat Americans like they are regular people rather than a collection of saints going around the world destroying countries for goody-two-shoes sentimental reasons. Sam Harris, the so-called antireligionist is a fervent adherent of this, "We're the good guys and "they" are very bad" dogma.

Yeah it is.  Even the "smart ones" are not spared  And it's orders of magnitudes worse among conservatives.

[vooke]

You are desperate appealing to authority.

For the umpteenth time show me what sanctions has US placed. Quoting someone who you are regurgitating is not smart.

Sanctions are easy to list. I gave you my list, and none of those affect Venezuela as a country, just individuals affiliated with Maduro and officials of Supreme Court which sent elected officials packing. INDIVIDUALS. Show me these other imaginary sanctions by the former rappateur

It's the freaking report presented to the UN after an authorised investigation: call that "appeal to authority" all you want: all you're doing is demonstrating you haven't the foggiest notion what "appeal to authority" even means. Have the US or these banks he cites on the report or anyone involved denied those FACTS cited in the report about those banks that froze Venezuelan cash? The list has been cited at 6.17 by the rapporteur on the clip you refuse to listen to and are in the report itself linked in the article you didn't read, so I'm not doing it for you. Apparently you think Rapporteurs go around making up facts about banks and presenting them to UN bodies and that said institutions (and their govt) simply choose to let those facts float around unchallenged. More fairy tales.

List the sanctions and how they affected the economy. Simple

[vooke]

You are desperate appealing to authority.

By the way, so what if I do, anyhow? I'm no expert, and I'm pretty sure you aren't either. We can't know everything about the world and we're not talking about logic but factual things: reliance on more than your reason will be required unless you're doing your own investigations. It's perfectly legitimate to choose to place faith in people who have followed the politics of U.S. foreign policy for decades and the Venezuelan situation for years. At least I know enough not to believe in simplistic ideas like "purely humanitarian" interests by a power that has consistently shown anything but in its foreign interventions. Yes, I learn from guys like these, and I see no downside to it:

Now I'm doubting even the notion that socialism itself caused the economic crisis. It seems they were never fully socialist and everyone agrees the Chaves years were not only excellent, they saved Venezuela from a history of abuse by oligarchs that saw millions suffer year after year. Their fatal mistake was simply failing to divest and save for a rainy day during their years of opulence, so when the prices fell they were caught flat-footed. If they had done that (divest and saved some) would we think socialism caused their crisis? Either way, as that Rapporteur and Chomsky say, they still would've pulled through the crises and resolved their problems if the West hadn't launched their economic warfare.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jun/27/venezuela-hugo-chavez-private-retailers

[Dear Mami]

It's not about Trump. The people calling out the U.S. involvement in Venezuela have been hypercritical of the antiTrump MSM train precisely because they think it only has the effect of making Trump hawkish just to prove his critics wrong. Chomsky has laughed off the Russiagate nonsense since it started, wondering how Americans of all people, can accuse other countries of meddling in the election of their leaders. He and many progressives have also called it BS and total fantasy from the beginning. These guys' main interest is not anti-Trumpism but anti the American regime change tradition.

The people with a knee-jerk anti-Trump bias, not caring for the consequences, are MSM, mainstream liberals and Democrats. To the contrary of what you believe, they are ALL actually pro Venezuelan intervention, pro-confrontations with Russia, and all pro-Syria war. They've been harrassing and treating Tulsi Gabbard horribly for her anti-interventionist stances, calling her an Assad apologist. Look at the smear they helped the Right wingers heap (or at least they didn't push back) on Ilhan Omar for merely voicing in public the truth that AIPAC exists and has an impact!

It's weird to wrap your brain around because these positions have been shifting between the Republicans and these batch of Democrats in the last few years, especially since Trump won. There was a time these same guys made fun of Republicans for making Putin a comic book villain, now the tables have turned and the "Russia is evil" Republicans have changed their tune quite a bit as have the Dems.

[vooke]

It's not about Trump. The people calling out the U.S. involvement in Venezuela have been hypercritical of the antiTrump MSM train precisely because they think it only has the effect of making Trump hawkish just to prove his critics wrong. Chomsky has laughed off the Russiagate nonsense since it started, wondering how Americans of all people, can accuse other countries of meddling in the election of their leaders. He and many progressives have also called it BS and total fantasy from the beginning. These guys' main interest is not anti-Trumpism but anti the American regime change tradition.

The people with a knee-jerk anti-Trump bias, not caring for the consequences, are MSM, mainstream liberals and Democrats. To the contrary of what you believe, they are ALL actually pro Venezuelan intervention, pro-confrontations with Russia, and all pro-Syria war. They've been harrassing and treating Tulsi Gabbard horribly for her anti-interventionist stances, calling her an Assad apologist. Look at the smear they helped the Right wingers heap (or at least they didn't push back) on Ilhan Omar for merely voicing in public the truth that AIPAC exists and has an impact!

It's weird to wrap your brain around because these positions have been shifting between the Republicans and these batch of Democrats in the last few years, especially since Trump won. There was a time these same guys made fun of Republicans for making Putin a comic book villain, now the tables have turned and the "Russia is evil" Republicans have changed their tune quite a bit as have the Dems.

[vooke]

Things are really bad in Venezuela, probably worse than Somalia. Sense is prevaling and now nobody blames Trump for their mess. It was long coming:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/17/world/americas/venezuela-economy.html