Most Irritating Third World Leader

[Bort]

I thought up this question after reading this http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12818045/ about how Hugo Chavez is thinking of giving away his F-16's to Cuba or Iran. That could deserve a topic on its own but it got me thinking, just who is that third world moron who really gets under your skin? Mine has got to be Chavez, his constant badgering of the US is driving me up the wall.

[Skybird]

Other. King Abdullah (Saudi Arabia).

[Ducimus]

WHAT?! I have to pick just one?! Awwwweeee

[August]

The poll is about the most irritating, not the most dangerous.

Therefore Chavez gets my vote.

[TteFAboB]

Chavez, no doubt, because he is the EASIEST to take down.

Stop buying his oil and he falls in a matter of days.

[Konovalov]

Originally Posted by August

The poll is about the most irritating, not the most dangerous.

Therefore Chavez gets my vote.

Gets my vote too. The guy is a top class clown putting on a show over here in London with the city mayor.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by *[FOX

* Bort]I thought up this question after reading this http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12818045/ about how Hugo Chavez is thinking of giving away his F-16's to Cuba or Iran. That could deserve a topic on its own but it got me thinking, just who is that third world moron who really gets under your skin? Mine has got to be Chavez, his constant badgering of the US is driving me up the wall.

This is where a reality check, i.e. context, can be useful. So look at the context and then tell me what part of this is unreasonable:

a: The F-16s were presumably bought from the US which also presumably supplies the parts needed to repair these planes and keep them operational;

b: Venezuela having bought these planes therefore owns them;

c: The US has just decided, ostensibly because Venezuela is insufficiently cooperative in the US War on Terror, to stop exporting arms to Venezuela which would include the parts needed to repair these planes and keep them operational;

d: Venezuela, due to this recent decision by the US government, now has a bunch of useless F-16s that it will no longer be able to maintain;

e: Venezuela considers selling these planes, which are now useless to them;

My question would then be: why do you hate capitalism so much, or do you simply not understand how the concept of ownership works?

Editted to add: I personally like Chavez. He seems to me to be a rare breed of leader who actually governs in the interests of his people rather than in the interests of the elite there or of Washington (this may come as a surprise to many here but Washington is actually not the center of the universe). In fact, given the atrocious history of US intervention in Latin America with its history of propping up a succession of terrible right-wing dictators, a reality check really is in order here.

[Kapitan]

well mugabe would be the worst ass hole we have too many zimbabweans in englan and more and more keep coming but because they come from an oppressed country if they are caught they are given visas regardless if they are illigal infact it pays them to come in illigaly cause if they did come in via the legal route they would be turned down at the gate.

[kiwi_2005]

Helen Clark - our prime minister who is turning NZ into a third world! :P

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by scandium

This is where a reality check, i.e. context, can be useful. So look at the context and then tell me what part of this is unreasonable:

a: The F-16s were presumably bought from the US which also presumably supplies the parts needed to repair these planes and keep them operational;

b: Venezuela having bought these planes therefore owns them;

c: The US has just decided, ostensibly because Venezuela is insufficiently cooperative in the US War on Terror, to stop exporting arms to Venezuela which would include the parts needed to repair these planes and keep them operational;

d: Venezuela, due to this recent decision by the US government, now has a bunch of useless F-16s that it will no longer be able to maintain;

e: Venezuela considers selling these planes, which are now useless to them;

My question would then be: why do you hate capitalism so much, or do you simply not understand how the concept of ownership works?

Editted to add: I personally like Chavez. He seems to me to be a rare breed of leader who actually governs in the interests of his people rather than in the interests of the elite there or of Washington (this may come as a surprise to many here but Washington is actually not the center of the universe). In fact, given the atrocious history of US intervention in Latin America with its history of propping up a succession of terrible right-wing dictators, a reality check really is in order here.

Not too mention the drug war which is an excuse to fight down resistance (local guerillas) to the deportation of local people due to - mostly Us - company interests. Especially Colombia on my mind. Prepare the ground for company interests - and sell it as an anti-drug campaign at home. Nice trick, almost everybody buys it. At the same time, again and again those mercenary companies and mercenaries of theirs that are doing the job down there, are engaged in drug smuggling and murder themselves.

Chavez stands in the way of US interests in southern America, and US attempts to press through a total free trade zone (which again will come at the cost of the poor). That'S why he is portrayed as the bully of the block now. Unfortunately, or thank God (a question of whose perspective you take), he is not the only one resisting the US. Several countries in Southern America have started to become stubborn to US demands, including Brazil (often overseen, but it is one of the coming megapowers of the world like India, China, and the like).

Plus Brazil is independent from oil - a bonus that is hard to be overestimated.

[mapuc]

If I should make the same poll on a Danish/swedish/finnish forum, I bet, that most of them would ask me, why I haven't put Bush on the list.

Markus

[Skybird]

Because every oppostion to him immediately melts in the shining light of his cleverness, competence and honesty. Maybe they should import him - such a bright light may help against winter depression.

[TteFAboB]

Originally Posted by scandium

Editted to add: I personally like Chavez. He seems to me to be a rare breed of leader who actually governs in the interests of his people rather than in the interests of the elite there or of Washington (this may come as a surprise to many here but Washington is actually not the center of the universe). In fact, given the atrocious history of US intervention in Latin America with its history of propping up a succession of terrible right-wing dictators, a reality check really is in order here.

Do you usually like things you know nothing about, only by what they seem to be?

Answer me these questions, Mr. reality check:

1. Does Chavez has the support of his people?

2. What actions has he taken in the interests of his people?

3. What did you see of terrible in the right-wing dictators propped by US intervention that you fail to spot in Chavez?

[TteFAboB]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Chavez stands in the way of US interests in southern America, and US attempts to press through a total free trade zone (which again will come at the cost of the poor). That'S why he is portrayed as the bully of the block now. Unfortunately, or thank God (a question of whose perspective you take), he is not the only one resisting the US. Several countries in Southern America have started to become stubborn to US demands, including Brazil (often overseen, but it is one of the coming megapowers of the world like India, China, and the like).

Plus Brazil is independent from oil - a bonus that is hard to be overestimated.

You have it all wrong.

The US never offered a total free trade zone, that would severely affect Americans in the benefit of South American poors, as happens with Germany and Romania for example. The original treaty favoured some American sectors and maintained protectionism.

"Several" countries are actually 4: Bolivia, Argentina, Brazil and Ecuador. Peru would join but after Chavez got involved with his candidate's campaign the Peruvians realized he would work for Chavez and not for the interests of Peru, and he dropped in the polls, Garcia might be elected instead, another demagogue, but not a Chavist.

Colombia, Uruguay, Chile and Paraguay prefer Washington over Chavez, except for Paraguay those already have bi-lateral agreements with the US. Brazil will most likely join this rank after the election in October.

Brazil is not independent from Oil, who lied this absurd to you?! Brazil reached what is called "self-sufficiency" of Oil, Brazil produces enough Oil to meet the internal demand. Another important point is that this self-sufficiency would not be possible if the Brazilian economy growed like that of India, China and the like, it is because of industrial and agricultural retractions or minor growth that it was possible to supply the demand, and also because the extraction is a state monopoly. But the only Oil self-sufficient nation that worked that I know of is Norway, all the others are dwelled in misery, corruption and tyranny.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by TteFAboB

Brazil is not independent from Oil, who lied this absurd to you?!

Probably ’60 Minutes’ they did a piece on how all of Brazil now uses Ethanol fuels (80-something % Ethanol) for its automobiles instead of normal oils like in the US.