Venezuela - coup d'état?

Grey Fox

*Russian Troll*
He he he. Just to demonstrate Septic stupidity.
Venezuela: The Next Syria | The American Spectator | Politics is too important to be taken seriously.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov recently denied that Russia was trying to create “another Syria” in Venezuela. Given Lavrov’s track record, we have to conclude that is precisely what Russia is doing.
Actually it is not Russia, who stealth Venezuela's money and attack its infrastructure. It is USA - well know terrorist-supporter failed state, and the threat to world.


In 1823, President James Monroe delivered his state of the union message to Congress. The most important part has become known as the Monroe Doctrine.
And in 1945, because of Russian victory over 3rd EU, was created UN. And joining to it, USA agreed not to intervent in the inner policy of another states whereever they situated - in East Europe or South America, or anywhere else.
We can use economic weapons in conjunction with military action.
Sure, they can. More they use economic as weapon - less they use economic as economic, sooner the Ponzi scheme of dollar will be collapsed.

Declaring the IRGC a foreign terrorist organization should have been accomplished years ago. The IRGC controls about half of the Iranian economy. It controls Iranian banks and finance as well as Iranian oil and gas, construction, real estate, and telecommunications. Any nation that trades with Iran — as many of our so-called NATO allies do — is trading with a terrorist organization and making it stronger. Declaring the IRGC a foreign terrorist organization will make that trade much harder to continue.
No problem. USA declared IRGC as 'terroristic organisation', Iran declared US Army as terroristic organisation (sure,they are not the only terroristic organisation in the USA).
Trump has many options, each of which will have to confront Russia and Iran directly. He can, for example order an air and sea blockade of Venezuela to prevent Russia and Iran from building their power there.
It will be open declaration of war to Venezuela, Cuba, Russia, China and Iran, and imaginary "threat" from Russian bases in Venezuela will be chaged into the immediate and more than real nuclear strike.
If they will try to start blocade 'de facto' without it official declaration, it will be acts of piracy and any military ship (including Russian submarines) will have to attack them, that, also, will mean leading to war escalation.
So - will the UK fight for (or against) USA in a case of Russian-American conflict in South Atlantic?
 
Last edited:

Grey Fox

*Russian Troll*
China'a soldiers in Venezuela uniform on Margarita island.
SAVE_20190410_071528.jpeg

So, question is still active - are Septics ready to war against Venezuela, Russia, China, Cuba and Iran simultaneously? Are Brits ready to join one of sides in this game?
 
US military ‘on the balls of our feet’ for Venezuela, says four-star admiral | Spectator USA
As Russian, Chinese and Iranian planes arrive in Venezuela to prop up President Nicolás Maduro, key Trump administration officials signaled that the US military is ready to respond.
But how? By bombings? Ground invasion? It would be a very risky endeavor.
‘President Trump is determined not to see Venezuela fall under the sway of foreign powers,’ Trump’s national security adviser John Bolton told radio host Hugh Hewitt Wednesday.
No, he wishes to see Venezuela as dependent state from the foreign power - the USA.
Bolton favorably referenced the Monroe Doctrine and said that if it ‘fails, if China and Russia, along with Cuba, establish domination over Venezuela, I think American strategic interests will be harmed.’
But other countries have own strategic interests. It is just ongoing geopolitical conflict.
Four-star Admiral Craig Faller, who leads the US Southern Command, said the military is ‘on the balls of our feet’ awaiting instruction from the Trump administration on military intervention in Venezuela.
I would be very surprised if the Admiral would say that the US military is not ready for the intervention in Venezuela.
 
It is interesting to note how mr.Pompeo defines the term 'tyrant'.
Venezuela crisis dominates Pompeo regional tour ahead of border visit
“Paraguay is a leader in defending democracy and calling Maduro as he is, a tyrant who has ruined his country,” Pompeo said.
Paraguay is a beacon on democracy and human rights? Free and fair elections in Paraguy? Really?
To please @scalieback I quote Reuters.
Paraguay presidential runner-up demands recount - Reuters
The No. 2 finisher in Paraguay’s presidential election said on Tuesday he had evidence of fraudulent voting and demanded a recount of ballots while the president-elect said he may try to change the constitution to allow reelection of future leaders.
“We already have very clear samples of fraud that we are going to denounce case by case,” Alegre said. “We are going to participate in the recount.”
Efrain Alegre, a lawyer from the center-left GANAR coalition, said on social media that the country’s official elections tribunal was too quick to announce that Mario Abdo of the conservative Colorado Party won the election.
Indeed 100% of ballots were not counted but the winner was named. It is something unthinkable in a democratic country.
With 97.67 percent of ballots counted on Sunday, the tribunal said Abdo won 46.44 percent to Alegre’s 42.74 percent.
As for the winner...
Abdo is the son of the late private secretary of dictator Alfredo Stroessner, who ruled Paraguay for 35 years. Abdo was 16 when Stroessner’s rule ended in 1989.
But let's return to mr.Pompeo.
“We have always said: with dictators, with tyrants, there is no dialogue. You fight them. We must fight them until liberties are restored so that the Venezuelan people can return to live with dignity,” he told reporters.
Does mr.Pompeo mean all dictators or only some of them?
Pompeo agrees North Korean leader Kim is a 'tyrant'
Senator Patrick Leahy, a Democrat, pointed to Pompeo's denunciations of Venezuela's leftist President Nicolas Maduro as a "tyrant" and asked if he would use similar language for Kim.
"Sure. I'm sure I've said that," Pompeo replied.
But
Pompeo, however, was unwilling to label as a tyrant Egypt's military ruler turned president, Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, who was hailed by Trump earlier on Tuesday in a White House meeting.
"There's no doubt that it's a mean, nasty world out there. But not every one of these leaders is the same," Pompeo said.
Of course, according to mr.Pompeo KSA rulers and other little Gulf dictators are not dictators at all.
"Some of them are trying to wipe entire nations off the face of the Earth and other are actually partnering with us to help keep Americans safe," he said.
I see, dictators who are ready to cooperate with Washington are not dictators according to mr.Pompeo.
"You might call them tyrant, you might call them authoritarian, but there is a fundamental difference, and therefore a fundamental difference in the way the US should respond," he said.
Immortal - He is a son of bitch but he is our son of bitch - springs in mind.
 
Thank you. Did he call Putin a tyrant?
Immortal - He is a son of bitch but he is our son of bitch - springs in mind.
Isn’t that everyone’s mantra? Or are you saying only the US uses it?

Anyway, back on track and of course the trolls peddle the Kremlin line but ignore their own views on what would happen in a similar scenario in Russia.
 
Indeed 100% of ballots were not counted but the winner was named. It is something unthinkable in a democratic country.
With 97.67 percent of ballots counted on Sunday, the tribunal said Abdo won 46.44 percent to Alegre’s 42.74 percent.
Go on. Explain what the problem is here.
 
Thank you. Did he call Putin a tyrant?

Isn’t that everyone’s mantra? Or are you saying only the US uses it?
Privately - maybe. On public ... it would be undiplomatic and he is not complete idiot.
As for pres.Trump then does mr.Pompeo regard him as a tyrant?
Privately - maybe. On public ... he is not complete idiot.
Anyway, back on track and of course the trolls peddle the Kremlin line but ignore their own views on what would happen in a similar scenario in Russia.
Anyway, what is your personal attitude to apparent double standards openly declared by mr.Pompeo?
 
Anyway, what is your personal attitude to apparent double standards openly declared by mr.Pompeo?
That the SoS calls some tyrants and not others? Quelle surprise. It's like one nation calling a group terrorists but invite them to meetings in that country and (allegedly) arm them. Double standards abound in politics.

I'm more interested in the subject matter of the thread and you saying if the same happened in Russia you wouldn't be happy, yet you continue to push the Kremlin line. That's 'double standards' for you.
 
Go on. Explain what the problem is here.
Many datails of elections in Paraguay point to rigged, fraudulent elections.
Conservative Abdo Benitez wins Paraguay election
The US-educated son of a senior aide to the country's late dictator,Abdo Benitez won slightly more than 46 percent of the vote, with his centrist opponent Efrain Alegre taking almost 43 percent in a race that was far closer than expected.
The difference between 46% and 43% is not big taking into account that
Opinion polls had consistently given Abdo Benitez, 46, a clear lead of up to 20 points over Alegre in a two-man contest to succeed outgoing conservative President Horacio Cartes.
Such a big difference between so called 'opinion polls' and official results is very suspicious. In such countries as Paraguay local elites control virtually everything including opinion polls and vote counting process.
Tobacco magnate Cartes kept Paraguay on course for year-on-year growth of about 4.0 percent in an economy whose major exports are soybeans, beef and hydroelectric power.
But there has been little progress in alleviating poverty that has remained stubbornly at 26.4 percent and corruption, with Paraguay languishing 135th out of 180 countries ranked by Transparency International.
Hardly one could expect free and fair elections in a country hit by corruption.
 
Many datails of elections in Paraguay point to rigged, fraudulent elections.
Conservative Abdo Benitez wins Paraguay election

The difference between 46% and 43% is not big taking into account that

Such a big difference between so called 'opinion polls' and official results is very suspicious. In such countries as Paraguay local elites control virtually everything including opinion polls and vote counting process.

Hardly one could expect free and fair elections in a country hit by corruption.
Please answer the specific question that I asked you.

"Indeed 100% of ballots were not counted but the winner was named. It is something unthinkable in a democratic country.
With 97.67 percent of ballots counted on Sunday, the tribunal said Abdo won 46.44 percent to Alegre’s 42.74 percent."

You claim to be an Engineer, so you can explain the mathematics as to why, with 97.67% of the vote counted, and with Abdo at 46.44% and Alegre at 42.74% you can see a problem.
 
That the SoS calls some tyrants and not others? Quelle surprise. It's like one nation calling a group terrorists but invite them to meetings in that country and (allegedly) arm them. Double standards abound in politics.
Yes, double standards in politics is not something new.
Thus it is impossible to describe policy of Washington as based on high moral standards.
On this point I agree with you.
I'm more interested in the subject matter of the thread and you saying if the same happened in Russia you wouldn't be happy...
It depends on the context. The devil is in the details. Of course, I would not be happy if something unpleasant would happen in Russia.
...yet you continue to push the Kremlin line. That's 'double standards' for you.
I have my own point of view and it could be the same or absolutely different in comparison with Kremlin's point of view. It depends on the context. The devil is in the details. I never said that something is true just because Putin, Lavrov or any Russian politician said it. I propose my own arguments, that you may not like.
 
Yes, double standards in politics is not something new.
Thus it is impossible to describe policy of Washington as based on high moral standards.
On this point I agree with you.

It depends on the context. The devil is in the details. Of course, I would not be happy if something unpleasant would happen in Russia.

I have my own point of view and it could be the same or absolutely different in comparison with Kremlin's point of view. It depends on the context. The devil is in the details. I never said that something is true just because Putin, Lavrov or any Russian politician said it. I propose my own arguments, that you may not like.
Not something you seem to be particularly good at.
 
Yes, double standards in politics is not something new.
Thus it is impossible to describe policy of Washington as based on high moral standards.
On this point I agree with you.
It's a bit apples and cauliflower again. But you'll try and tar everyone with the same lack of standards of your own 'crooks and thieves'
It depends on the context. The devil is in the details. Of course, I would not be happy if something unpleasant would happen in Russia.
Why does it depend on the context? Either you're happy with Putin bringing elections forward, not allowing the Communist party a vote, rigging the elections and then calling for foreign troops to support him or you're not
I have my own point of view and it could be the same or absolutely different in comparison with Kremlin's point of view. It depends on the context. The devil is in the details. I never said that something is true just because Putin, Lavrov or any Russian politician said it. I propose my own arguments, that you may not like.
You rarely if ever go off piste. The only difference is you'll call Putin and co 'crooks and thieves'. The rest, agitation, lies, obfuscation, whataboutery etc. is directly from the Kremlin play book
 
Please answer the specific question that I asked you.

"Indeed 100% of ballots were not counted but the winner was named. It is something unthinkable in a democratic country.
With 97.67 percent of ballots counted on Sunday, the tribunal said Abdo won 46.44 percent to Alegre’s 42.74 percent."

You claim to be an Engineer, so you can explain the mathematics as to why, with 97.67% of the vote counted, and with Abdo at 46.44% and Alegre at 42.74% you can see a problem.
Technically it could be correct. If remaining part of ballots is lesser that the difference between current results of contenders then the winner could be determined ... if the elections as absolutely free, fair and transparent.
2018 Paraguayan general election - Wikipedia
Registered voters 4,241,507
Voted 2,597,989
Benitez 1,206,067
Alegre 1,110,464
Difference 95,603
Invalid ballots 134,548
Some invalid ballots could be spoiled intentionally. It is enough to put vote marks for several candidates incuding the main ones and that's all.
In our case number of invalid ballots is suspiciously high.
How many ballots could mr.Benitez get using falsifications? A lot of them.
 
It's a bit apples and cauliflower again. But you'll try and tar everyone with the same lack of standards of your own 'crooks and thieves'

Why does it depend on the context? Either you're happy with Putin bringing elections forward, not allowing the Communist party a vote, rigging the elections and then calling for foreign troops to support him or you're not

You rarely if ever go off piste. The only difference is you'll call Putin and co 'crooks and thieves'. The rest, agitation, lies, obfuscation, whataboutery etc. is directly from the Kremlin play book
Elections is Russia are not free and fair. Falsehoods and vote rigging are widespread.
Russia is owned and ruled by oligarchs and clans of corrupted officials.
Living standards in Russia the last years are not growing, stagnating at best.
If it is Kremlin propaganda then remain in your fantasy-land.
As for geopolitical contest between Russia and the USA then it is something that shape our World. It will continue with the next Russian and US presidents.
Should Russia surrender? should Russia become Washington's puppet (as many other countries including the UK)? My answer is - No.
You may regard it as Kremlin line, as agitprop. But it is my own opinion, like you it or not.
As for Venezuela then I regard Putin's geopolitical investments in the country as doubtful. It is a wrong place for geopolitical contest. You may also regard it as Kremlin's agitprop.
 
Technically it could be correct. If remaining part of ballots is lesser that the difference between current results of contenders then the winner could be determined ... if the elections as absolutely free, fair and transparent.
2018 Paraguayan general election - Wikipedia
Registered voters 4,241,507
Voted 2,597,989
Benitez 1,206,067
Alegre 1,110,464
Difference 95,603
Invalid ballots 134,548
Some invalid ballots could be spoiled intentionally. It is enough to put vote marks for several candidates incuding the main ones and that's all.
In our case number of invalid ballots is suspiciously high.
How many ballots could mr.Benitez get using falsifications? A lot of them.
Or to summarise, with 97.67% of the ballot counted, it was already mathematically impossible for Alegre to catch up, so even in the most democratic country in the world there would be absolutely no problem in calling the result.

Or put another way, you've been caught bullshitting again.
 
Elections is Russia are not free and fair. Falsehoods and vote rigging are widespread.
Russia is owned and ruled by oligarchs and clans of corrupted officials.
Living standards in Russia the last years are not growing, stagnating at best.
If it is Kremlin propaganda then remain in your fantasy-land.
Your Foreign Policy, until questioned echoes that of the Kremlin. It was interesting to see the debate between yourselves on the Ukraine thread.
As for geopolitical contest between Russia and the USA then it is something that shape our World. It will continue with the next Russian and US presidents.
Indeed. The 'blip' from the 90's is over.
Should Russia surrender? should Russia become Washington's puppet (as many other countries including the UK)? My answer is - No.
Nobody is talking about surrender. It's Putin getting his own back for the 'loss' of the USSR. Others will continue that mantra.
You may regard it as Kremlin line, as agitprop. But it is my own opinion, like you it or not.
As above
As for Venezuela then I regard Putin's geopolitical investments in the country as doubtful. It is a wrong place for geopolitical contest. You may also regard it as Kremlin's agitprop.
Why support the Kremlin line on Venezuela then?
 

Latest Threads

Top