I wouldn’t worry too much about Russians putting missiles in Venezuela. And however much of a windbag Chavez is, he’s of no real concern to the US.

And no, I don’t base his threat on . First, he readily admits how much he admires Castro and how he considers him a mentor. The same Fidel Castro that let the Soviets put missiles in Cuba. He gives Cuba free oil and spent a lot of time with Castro, when the man was healthy. Second, Chavez once tried to seize control of government through a failed coup d’etat back in the early 90s. He allows very little dissent, and has shown as much by sending the military to quell a student protest… by opening fire on them. And this was all before his second attempt to remove term limits (essentially making him dictator for life) passed.

As for his latest antics? He locked the mayor of Caracas out of his office (the mayor happens to be part of the opposing party). He told the military to seize the ports of provinces whose governors were part of the opposing party. And if the governors did not comply, Chavez said to just throw them in jail.

I am not speaking to throwing stupid comments and insults at Bush. If that was the most worrying thing, I wouldn’t care. But someone with an ego as big as Chavez wouldn’t think twice about undermining the US if he could get away with it. He can be put in his place, like the King of Spain did.

Bush created problems for many elected leaders throughout the world. I would wait to see how Chavez behaves over the next 6-12 months. I really don’t think he’s anywhere near as bad as you may believe. I think alot of the things he did while Bush was in office were just “positioning” rather than an honest attempt to undermine the USA. The populist movement in South America is very popular right now and popularly elected leaders down there appear to be following a trend line in that direction.

Venezuela is no where near the same land mass as the United States. According to the CIA factbook it is roughly twice the size of CA – are you sure you weren’t thinking of Brazil?

Mr. Reynolds: Who is Hugo Chavez? Well, he’s the President of a country that is the same landmass as the US. Second, he’s a man who is willing to let the Russians put missiles in his country (I wonder who they’ll be aiming at?). Third, he’s a man who regularly berates the US for imperialism yet has meddled in the politics of other Latin American countries for years, which includes helping terrorists in Columbia. Lastly, he’s been very, very friendly with Ahmadinejad and been very supportive of their nuclear program. But of course, he is no threat.

I was upset that Bush ignored this problem for years, but if Obama isn’t careful, things may get worse.

“I think I’ll be a clown when I get grown,” said Dill. “Yes, sir, a clown…. There ain’t one thing in this world I can do about folks except laugh, so I’m gonna join the circus and laugh my head off.” “You got it backwards, Dill,” said Jem. “Clowns are sad, it’s folks that laugh at them.” “Well, I’m gonna be a new kind of clown. I’m gonna stand in the middle of the ring and laugh at the folks.”

Harper Lee – “To Kill a Mockingbird”

The point is to know who is and who is not a threat. Hugo Chavez? President of Citgo? Not so much a threat. Although the prices at some of his mini-marts are crimes against humanity.

so by your logic, i should shake the hand of a guy who is always saying, day in day out “death to sabrewulf” and threatening to kill me.

i dont know where you get that logic from, but its warped.

Clinton is a Democrat.

and you are seriously saying that Reagan met Gorbachev under a position of weakness , when in fact he MASSIVELY expanded the U.S. nuclear deterrent?

Keep rewriting history mate – thats what lefties like you always do.

First of all, we’re not talking about just a handshake, and note too that I’m not one of the hystericals equating a handshake to the fourth horseman of the apocalypse. Shedding some light on *why* folks on the right take this as a bad sign was my aim. So, some thoughts:

Kevin: wow, touchy. Obama is certainly no Hitler; he’s a charismatic leader who motivates millions with the power of his words. The right’s worry is, more realistically, that he *might* be a Chamberlain, without enough seasoning to know when a foreign leader is being genuine or nefarious. If you follow the mental thread on Roadhouse Diplomacy (and Gerry, little known fact that the Republican guide to foreign policy is only 4 pages long), where Republicans go wrong is that they come off as having zero interest in diplomacy–their world view is “Never be nice no matter what.”

Kranky: bless, you, you love your guy. Personally I think you give him too much credit in the shrewdness and savvy category.

Nero: Man, you should be in politics. You take my comment and then shift gears into a really convenient either/or choice. Back on point, though, is that significant attacks against American interests in the past 30 years haven’t been from organizations with big armies or massive national coffers. So my point is simply that Wayne’s reasoning holds a lot more water than “Their army is small, so no big deal.”

Good times–always good to see a thread break the 20 mark.

Obamapologists–Activate!

Oh darn, we wouldn’t want to have that option, would we? If we don’t have enemies, we don’t giant defense budgets and boogey-men to keep the party base in line.

Hey, I am not saying that we can make everyone love us, nor that we should–but we should not allow the past to always dictate our future actions.

Still, having lived through those years, I can’t escape the overwhelming impression of weakness and malaise and feeling that it connected to Jimmy Carter. He seems to me to be to be a fundamentally decent human being, and worthy of admiration on many counts even if you don’t agree with his tacks in old age. Yet if I had only one word to describe him as President, it would be ineffectual.

Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com