Hugo Chavez has months to live

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
The crime statistic is worrying, yeah, so there's not much I can say about that other than crime is prevalent when there are inequalities, so basically, just about everywhere. It is a bit of a problem.

Brainwashing the poor into socialism and against capitalism? I laughed, I would call it awakening class-consciousness. I don't know if I would label it brainwashing since socialism is to bring the workers into power. It's much, much better for them.

As for the housing thing, seems a better solution than the poor being homeless, and it's not as if there aren't housing projects for poor families being built.

I couldn't give any less of a shit about the upper classes leaving the country. In addition, I can't really see Chavez going all power hungry and becoming a raving dictator as from what I've read, but I'm not entirely certain of anything anymore. In regards to Cuba, I can't help but feel that you think that the embargo was actually justified, but they've done well for a somewhat isolated state capitalist nation.
 
Allowing three or more homeless strangers to live in your house free of charge because the government says so is not a solution to homelessness.

Would you seriously do it?
 
When was this policy of expropriating rooms in occupied private dwellings instituted? Do you have a link?
 
By KEJAL VYAS

CARACAS—Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez signed a new rental law into effect over the weekend that obliges landlords to sell their property to tenants of more than 20 years at state-mandated discounts based on how long the space has been rented.

Mr. Chávez hailed the law as a way of opening housing to the country's poor and extending tenants' rights, but critics see the law as a political ploy to compensate for a struggling state home-building initiative.

Under the law, the state will create a fund to provide loans to tenants interested in buying rented real estate, while landlords, who will have to register all their holdings, face heavy fines for violating the regulations and the possibility of having their property expropriated by the government for repeat offenses. Owners also are forbidden from requesting security deposits from tenants.

"There are urban landlords who own 15, 20 buildings and exploit the people," Mr. Chávez said during the signing ceremony for the law. "Many times they leave the country; they don't even live here, nobody knows them."

Housing is set to be a major issue in next year's presidential elections, and Venezuela's top real-estate association says Mr. Chávez is using the law to provide constituents with housing that his government promised but is struggling to deliver.

"They are completely violating the concept of private property with this law," said Aquiles Martini, president of the Venezuela Real Estate Chamber. "The government has a target for construction in its housing mission, but there's no way they are going to be able to do it so they are using laws like these to meet the deficit," he added.

In February, Mr. Chávez pledged his government would build two million homes for the poor over the next seven years as part of his "Grand Housing Mission Venezuela" project. The government, which set a target of 153,000 homes for 2011, says it has so far this year overseen the construction of 85,000.

Venezuela Forces Sale of Rental Properties - WSJ.com

There's also this article below stating that he's closing down Venezuela's consulate in Miami, mainly because pretty much all the Venezuelan exiles in Miami are against him and he doesn't want them to vote against him in this year's election.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...nal-assembly/2012/01/13/gIQAQrOjwP_story.html
 
You wanna try that again? We all make mistakes sometimes.:hug:

Aww, a poor victim of the American war propaganda machine.

It's okay, you're right. If it wasn't for the great George W. Bush, then Saddam Hussein would have invaded Israel (a nation incapable of defending itself) with his vast nuclear arsenal. And Iraq may have even attacked the United States again, like it did on 9/11. So the tens of millions of lives killed, injured, or traumatized as a result of your hero, Mr. Bush, were all worth it in the very very long run.
 
Aww, a poor victim of the American war propaganda machine.

It's okay, you're right. If it wasn't for the great George W. Bush, then Saddam Hussein would have invaded Israel (a nation incapable of defending itself) with his vast nuclear arsenal. And Iraq may have even attacked the United States again, like it did on 9/11. So the tens of millions of lives killed, injured, or traumatized as a result of your hero, Mr. Bush, were all worth it in the very very long run.

:eyebrow:

You know what? I'm not going to engage. There's no point, and this isn't the place for it. I'll be the better person and let this one go.
 
most evil man in the world? no.

worst president in all of our lifetimes? yes.

Most evil man based on the number of lives lost or shattered. Who has hurt more people then him? I can't think of anyone, and do correct me if I'm wrong. But for that reason he definitely deserves the title.
 
:eyebrow:

You know what? I'm not going to engage. There's no point, and this isn't the place for it. I'll be the better person and let this one go.

Sure, well there wouldn't be much truth to say on your part anyway if you did engage.
 
Most evil man based on the number of lives lost or shattered. Who has hurt more people then him? I can't think of anyone, and do correct me if I'm wrong. But for that reason he definitely deserves the title.



if you're talking aggregate death, i suppose you have to put Harry Truman right up there, right, historically speaking, in terms of number of human beings wiped out in a matter of seconds?

i think reasons why lives are lost has to count for something, and i don't see the invasion of Iraq -- as hideous, stupid as it was, and if you go through the archives here you'll find no one more opposed than i was from the start -- as insidiously "evil" as mass starvation in North Korea, the junta in Myanmar/Burma, the Lord's Resistance Army, the butchery of the cartels of Juarez, people like Mugabe, Assad, etc.
 
:eyebrow:

You know what? I'm not going to engage. There's no point, and this isn't the place for it. I'll be the better person and let this one go.

I personally don't agree that George Bush is the "most evil man in the world" but on the other hand your Joan-of-Arc/burnt-martyr-of-the-much-maligned-and-misunderstood neo-con spiel is getting old. You got any other records to play?
 
Most evil man based on the number of lives lost or shattered. Who has hurt more people then him? I can't think of anyone, and do correct me if I'm wrong. But for that reason he definitely deserves the title.

Do the names Adolf Hitler or Joseph Stalin ring a bell? And that's just two off the top of my head.

I'm certainly never going to be prasing the Bush administration in my lifetime, but Irvine pretty much summed it up well.
 
Do the names Adolf Hitler or Joseph Stalin ring a bell? And that's just two off the top of my head.

I'm certainly never going to be prasing the Bush administration in my lifetime, but Irvine pretty much summed it up well.

Hitler and Stalin have been dead for decades.

"Most evil man in the world", not "most evil man of all time".
 
if you're talking aggregate death, i suppose you have to put Harry Truman right up there, right, historically speaking, in terms of number of human beings wiped out in a matter of seconds?

i think reasons why lives are lost has to count for something, and i don't see the invasion of Iraq -- as hideous, stupid as it was, and if you go through the archives here you'll find no one more opposed than i was from the start -- as insidiously "evil" as mass starvation in North Korea, the junta in Myanmar/Burma, the Lord's Resistance Army, the butchery of the cartels of Juarez, people like Mugabe, Assad, etc.

Fair enough. Reason for death matters, I agree. And so I don't include the lives lost in Afghanistan, because ok, we went there to to destroy the group that had attacked us on 9/11. On the other hand, invading a country based on lies in order to steal oil is evil. And so with the number of people murdered, perhaps Bush is not #1 in the world today. But no doubt he is up there in the ranks as one of the most evil people of all time.

Glad to know that you were opposed to the war from the very beginning, as was I. It was so obvious to me, and I couldn't get how it wasn't obvious to the 75% or so of people who supported it.
 
Glad to know that you were opposed to the war from the very beginning, as was I. It was so obvious to me, and I couldn't get how it wasn't obvious to the 75% or so of people who supported it.

The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one.
 
Hitler and Stalin have been dead for decades.

"Most evil man in the world", not "most evil man of all time".

Eh, semantics. But still, there's mass genocide happening in places like Darfur, for instance, children being kidnapped and made to become child killers, to name a couple current examples, so there's a lot of really sadistic crap going on out there that could give those who are encouraging it or participating in it the title of "most evil in the world today".

And honestly, there's people in the Bush administration that scare me more than Bush himself. Bush was just flat out stupid/ignorant/whatever word you wish to use. There were others that were much more...creepy.

I was opposed to Iraq from the start, too. Heck, I wasn't fond of going into Afghanistan. I'm no military expert, but I have to believe, with all our technology and as strong as our military is, we could've easily dealt with the people who attacked us in a much smaller, quicker, less messy, much better planned manner. We didn't need to invade a country and screw it up even worse to do that.
 
Eh, semantics. But still, there's mass genocide happening in places like Darfur, for instance, children being kidnapped and made to become child killers, to name a couple current examples, so there's a lot of really sadistic crap going on out there that could give those who are encouraging it or participating in it the title of "most evil in the world today".

And honestly, there's people in the Bush administration that scare me more than Bush himself. Bush was just flat out stupid/ignorant/whatever word you wish to use. There were others that were much more...creepy.

I was opposed to Iraq from the start, too. Heck, I wasn't fond of going into Afghanistan. I'm no military expert, but I have to believe, with all our technology and as strong as our military is, we could've easily dealt with the people who attacked us in a much smaller, quicker, less messy, much better planned manner. We didn't need to invade a country and screw it up even worse to do that.

I sincerely meant living in the world today, and did so on purpose so I can give Bush the crown of most evil, because sure, he's not as bad as Hitler.

And in regards to the administration, yea Cheney and Rumsfeld are also evil. I've thought about this, and at the end of the day it was Bush who had all the power to give the order for war. It was Bush's responsibility to make the right decision, and instead he succumbed to greed and made the wrong one. As asinine as Bush is, he's smart enough to realize right from wrong. And so in my book, he's just as bad as Cheney.

Bush has this friendlier, more innocent image than does Cheney. And so I think people are willing to forgive him more easily. And his stupidity helps make him look innocent.

And I agree about Afghanistan. I supported that war, but it could have been much easier, without all the nation building.
 
I sincerely meant living in the world today, and did so on purpose so I can give Bush the crown of most evil, because sure, he's not as bad as Hitler.

Fair enough. I still disagree, but you've got your opinion, so we'll just leave it at that and let it be.

And in regards to the administration, yea Cheney and Rumsfeld are also evil. I've thought about this, and at the end of the day it was Bush who had all the power to give the order for war. It was Bush's responsibility to make the right decision, and instead he succumbed to greed and made the wrong one. As asinine as Bush is, he's smart enough to realize right from wrong. And so in my book, he's just as bad as Cheney.

Bush has this friendlier, more innocent image than does Cheney. And so I think people are willing to forgive him more easily. And his stupidity helps make him look innocent.

I think that's a fair assessment. Though, honestly, even though he was president, I'm fully convinced Bush wasn't in charge at all the whole time he was in office. Corporate buddies and Cheney and Rumsfeld and them probably had more genuine power than he did. Sometimes I tend to think being president is a mere title nowadays, it doesn't seem to hold the power it once did due to all sorts of other outside influences.

Let's not forget Ashcroft, either, what a barrel of monkeys THAT guy was.

And I agree about Afghanistan. I supported that war, but it could have been much easier, without all the nation building.

I really hate it when we get into nation-building. It never ends well. Ever. We're telling people to do things we can't seem to do well in our own country, we're horribly patronizing and ignorant of the area and people, and we get involved in stupid wars as a result, civil or otherwise, and it's generally pretty hard for people to enjoy their "new country" we want to give them if they're, you know, dead.
 
Fair enough. I still disagree, but you've got your opinion, so we'll just leave it at that and let it be.

Okay, maybe not most evil man, considering the genocide in Darfur and other crises that the world faces. But he's certainly up there on the list.


I think that's a fair assessment. Though, honestly, even though he was president, I'm fully convinced Bush wasn't in charge at all the whole time he was in office. Corporate buddies and Cheney and Rumsfeld and them probably had more genuine power than he did. Sometimes I tend to think being president is a mere title nowadays, it doesn't seem to hold the power it once did due to all sorts of other outside influences.

Let's not forget Ashcroft, either, what a barrel of monkeys THAT guy was.

You're right. It's like asking who deserves more blame for 9/11, Osama bin Laden or Khalid Sheik Mohammad? The former was the leader but the latter was the chief architect.

I really hate it when we get into nation-building. It never ends well. Ever. We're telling people to do things we can't seem to do well in our own country, we're horribly patronizing and ignorant of the area and people, and we get involved in stupid wars as a result, civil or otherwise, and it's generally pretty hard for people to enjoy their "new country" we want to give them if they're, you know, dead.

Spot on. The idea of nation building is silly and hypocritical. Democracies get built at the will of the people, from bottoms up. Forcing a nation to act a certain way kills the very idea of democracy, and is more representative of dictatorship.
 
You are correct. Unfortunately we can't fix the brainwashed minds of stupid, right-wing nutcases like yourself who believe that the Earth is 5,000 years old.

As to the first part, I'll gladly wear the badge of "right-wing nutcase" if the decorating is to be done by one who "highly respects" Hugo Chavez.

As for the second, I've thought about it and can't seem to recall ever mentioning that I thought the earth was 5,000 years old. Can you help me out and show me the thread?
 
As to the first part, I'll gladly wear the badge of "right-wing nutcase" if the decorating is to be done by one who "highly respects" Hugo Chavez.

As for the second, I've thought about it and can't seem to recall ever mentioning that I thought the earth was 5,000 years old. Can you help me out and show me the thread?

You know, I gladly accept being called stupid by any idiot who supports Bush and his war.

Maybe you never said the earth is 5,000 years old. I guess it's guilt by association with your fellow nutcases.
 
You know, I gladly accept being called stupid by any idiot who supports Bush and his war.

Maybe you never said the earth is 5,000 years old. I guess it's guilt by association with your fellow nutcases.

I'm as far away from a Bush supporter and religious nut as you can get, but aren't you the resident conspiracy theorist? By definition, you'll believe any retarded shit someone feeds you, as long as it carries an anti-government sentiment
 
So what exactly is going to happen if Chavez dies?

- He dies and due to the support that he has from his people, someone belonging to his party that has the same socialistic ideals as him would get elected as president and continue with the so-called revolution, probably with a lesser extent of the planning that Chavez had in mind or maybe beyond from what he had planned.

- The opposition could riot and elect another guy as president, and is likely that this candidate would make false promises and carry on with the corruption that Venezuela has faced over the last three decades, or probably he could become a real democratic president and help the country and its citizens to progress in the long run (the latter being highly unlikely).

Regardless of whether if these two scenarios occur, rioting, protests, violence, and blood will be noticed during the transition.
 
I'm as far away from a Bush supporter and religious nut as you can get, but aren't you the resident conspiracy theorist? By definition, you'll believe any retarded shit someone feeds you, as long as it carries an anti-government sentiment

Care to explain? I don't ever recall participating in any conspiracy theories.

But if you think that the War in Iraq being based on lies is "retarded shit" and that those of us who believe that Bush and Cheney are evil and greedy for going to war for oil are conspiracy theorists, maybe you're not that far away from being a Bush supporter as you think you are.
 
Do the names Adolf Hitler or Joseph Stalin ring a bell? And that's just two off the top of my head.

Meh, they don't look so bad

193561d1327036256-funny-strange-random-pics-3ed7bda8aec99146af25a6ff07435dba.jpg
 
Care to explain? I don't ever recall participating in any conspiracy theories.

But if you think that the War in Iraq being based on lies is "retarded shit" and that those of us who believe that Bush and Cheney are evil and greedy for going to war for oil are conspiracy theorists, maybe you're not that far away from being a Bush supporter as you think you are.

Oh ya, my mistake. You're the one with the authority issues
 
Back
Top Bottom