[garcia3441]

Criticism of Hugo Chávez - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That's pretty much all I know about him.

[oompa]

lol there is a wikipage for criticism of hugo chaves

skipped through it, and some parts seems a shifty, some things i have no problems with. i dont know about the manipulating elections thing, if thats true of course its wrong.

about supporting iran, i have no problem with that, or with them developing nukes. if 10 countries can have em, there is nothing saying that others can't, i get sick from the watching the US trying to decide who can and who cannot have nukes when they have more nukes than the rest of the world combined themseleves and is the only country to ever use em in war.

and as i write i watch a speech by bush on cnn, where he keeps babbling about how iran "poses a threat to the world". understand that the US isnt "the world", and again old clown, dont try to pull the rest of us into the meaningless crusade YOU started. its great that he warns about threats, but before you disarm any other country, start by getting rid of your own supply jackass. sry for that mini-rant

i have no problem with Chavez criticism towards israel in the palestine-israel conflict, the US is about the only country to support israel in that conflict, so hes no different from almost any other leader (unless i missed something).

anyway, thanks for the article garcia, its now about all i know about him as well. unfortunately it left me equally indecisive (?). i think ill leave him as "umm.. ok for now"

[Vegetta]

Originally Posted by Lee

The sooner he's gone, the better.

That guy is a bit scary

[BigM555]

Originally Posted by oompa

and as i write i watch a speech by bush on cnn, where he keeps babbling about how iran "poses a threat to the world". understand that the US isnt "the world", and again old clown, dont try to pull the rest of us into the meaningless crusade YOU started. its great that he warns about threats, but before you disarm any other country, start by getting rid of your own supply jackass. sry for that mini-rant

Just a point of clarification;

I believe that a major concern with many of these "undesirable" countries gaining nuclear weapons is not so much their having possession of them but the fact that their governments have proven less than stable and may not retain control of them.

The concern is that those arms could easily end up in the control of radicals. That scenario is much less likely for the existing countries.

It's a bad situation when those that have are apparently oppressing those that don't. Keep in mind it's not only the US who has concerns about countries like Iran and North Korea gaining access to nuclear arms.

Not trying to change your mind just pointing out something that doesn't seem to be acknowledged by your post.

Edit: This should in NO WAY be construed as an endorsement of Bush's policies.

[oompa]

thats cool man i understand what you mean. and i see every nuke as a symbol of human failure, but restricting some countries and allowing some based on assumptions... international law should ban nuclear weapons instead, but the first country to not give a fk is.. yeh. and after that no other country would care either.

i fully understand that americans fear that Iran might sell nukes to al-quaida or equals after developing them, but that instability is matched by the -government- of the US in many peoples eyes. if all countries in the world made pre-emptive strikes and restrictions were put based on assumptions, i imagine a cute world war and international anarchy.

since WW2 something like 4-5 wars have been started by the US. counting iraq*2, nam, korea, afghanistan and syria, the following presidents have warred for the US since eisenhower: truman, kennedy, johnson, nixon, reagan, h.w bush and bush (i wiki'd). some of them surely less suspicious, but add to that all the other conflicts the US has taken armed side in, i fail to see the US as particularly stable -either-.

i dont like nukes in anyone's hands, but i believe in equal treatment even on this one. sry for drifting off topic peace.

[Jongpil Yun]

Originally Posted by BigM555

Just a point of clarification;

I believe that a major concern with many of these "undesirable" countries gaining nuclear weapons is not so much their having possession of them but the fact that their governments have proven less than stable and may not retain control of them.

The concern is that those arms could easily end up in the control of radicals. That scenario is much less likely for the existing countries.

Like Russia.

[BigM555]

Originally Posted by Jongpil Yun

Like Russia.

Touchê.

Of course this could be used as an example of why there is foundation for the fears.

And I agree with you Oompa, a much better solution would be to have none. But as the famous quote goes "You can't put the genie back in the bottle".