Real World Event Discussions
Honduras Defends Its Democracy!
POSTED BY: Skywalken
UPDATED: Sunday, July 5, 2009 04:15
VIEWED: 13327
PAGE 2 of 6
Wednesday, July 1, 2009 6:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
I can't understand why the press, or the Obama Administration, or the ever useless UN are all calling this a coup and condemning it, let alone demanding that Zelaya be returned to power. If CNN's story is correct, then all that's happened is that Zelaya tried a Hugo Chavez type 'President for Life' move, and got smacked for it.
They're calling it a military coup because that's typically what you call it when the military deposes a leader and either takes over the country itself or installs a new leader. The term "military coup" has negative connotations, but that doesn't mean it's ALWAYS a bad thing - occasionally the country is better off for it, especially if the military clears out a corrupt government and paves the way for legitimate elections to take place.
'Course, Obama's not playing ball because he realizes that something similar could happen here, and he doesn't want any part of seeming to support such actions. :)Quote:
The story says that the Supreme Court ruled Zelaya's actions unconstitutional, and that the military refused to act on Zelaya's orders.
If only we could have been so lucky at some point in the last 8 years...
Mike
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
-----------------
Well, the difference is, that Zelaya was trying to extend his presidency in violation of the constitution. Bush, for all his faults, and as a Republican I will say there were many, never tried something like that.
I agree with you though about the title, and the conotations. It's not always a bad thing. I can't understand the uproar, though, considering that the civilian government, again sans ex-president wanna be for life, is in charge rather than the military.
You ever feel like a mushroom when you see the news? Kept in the dark and fed a lot of $hit? I know I do. Maybe our problem is that we've become so used to having worldwide news at our beckon call, knowing everything that happens, everywhere.
Only we don't really know, do we?
I don't think Obama has to worry about a 'coup' here, though. We've never had one, and I don't think the professional military would support one. And, while I don't like Obama and his socialist agenda, I haven't seen anything he's done that would rate a 'coup', lol. I know he's broken campaign promises, and lots of people are making hay over that, but good grief, what politician hasn't lied?
It is kinda funny though that Obama can basically say nothing about what's happening in Iran, and then raise all kinds of hell about what looks like the Honduran's just taking out the trash.
But, like I said, we don't really know everything, about anything. Who's to say?
Bad_karma
Great and Exalted Grand Pooba, International Brotherhood of Moonshiners, Rednecks, and Good Old Boys.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wednesday, July 1, 2009 7:28 PM
The Honduran military got it right...Zelaya was trying to color outside of the lines;essentially laying the groundwork for "President for Life",AFTER both his own nations Supreme Court AND their Congress replied:"Nope"....I'd say he got off pretty lucky to hav efound a nice berth ELSEWHERE as opposed to "whereabouts unknown at this time"....
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wednesday, July 1, 2009 7:42 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by gripper:
The Honduran military got it right...Zelaya was trying to color outside of the lines;essentially laying the groundwork for "President for Life",AFTER both his own nations Supreme Court AND their Congress replied:"Nope"....I'd say he got off pretty lucky to hav efound a nice berth ELSEWHERE as opposed to "whereabouts unknown at this time"....
-----------------
That's how I'm inclined to see it, based on what I've read so far.
Bad_karma
Great and Exalted Grand Pooba, International Brotherhood of Moonshiners, Rednecks, and Good Old Boys.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wednesday, July 1, 2009 7:49 PM
Just a tiny quibble. The Honduran congress and court got it right. The military simply acted at their behest. They remained under civilian control and did not take independent inititive in their actions.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wednesday, July 1, 2009 9:20 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by badkarma00:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
I can't understand why the press, or the Obama Administration, or the ever useless UN are all calling this a coup and condemning it, let alone demanding that Zelaya be returned to power. If CNN's story is correct, then all that's happened is that Zelaya tried a Hugo Chavez type 'President for Life' move, and got smacked for it.
They're calling it a military coup because that's typically what you call it when the military deposes a leader and either takes over the country itself or installs a new leader. The term "military coup" has negative connotations, but that doesn't mean it's ALWAYS a bad thing - occasionally the country is better off for it, especially if the military clears out a corrupt government and paves the way for legitimate elections to take place.
'Course, Obama's not playing ball because he realizes that something similar could happen here, and he doesn't want any part of seeming to support such actions. :)Quote:
The story says that the Supreme Court ruled Zelaya's actions unconstitutional, and that the military refused to act on Zelaya's orders.
If only we could have been so lucky at some point in the last 8 years...
Mike
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
-----------------
Well, the difference is, that Zelaya was trying to extend his presidency in violation of the constitution. Bush, for all his faults, and as a Republican I will say there were many, never tried something like that.
Never? "Enhanced Interrogation"? Warrantless wiretaps? Extraordinary rendition? Those all sound constitutional to you?
Quote:
I agree with you though about the title, and the conotations. It's not always a bad thing. I can't understand the uproar, though, considering that the civilian government, again sans ex-president wanna be for life, is in charge rather than the military.
Agreed. It looks like this might be the rare occasion when the military stepped in, took control of the situation, ousted a president who was trying to do something unconstitutional, and then handed control back to the LEGITIMATE civilian authorities. And I reiterate: We should have been so lucky at any time in the last 8 years. And we may need that kind of luck in the next 4 or more... not that I think we'll get any help at all out of these milquetoasts.
Quote:
You ever feel like a mushroom when you see the news? Kept in the dark and fed a lot of $hit? I know I do. Maybe our problem is that we've become so used to having worldwide news at our beckon call, knowing everything that happens, everywhere.
Yes! A few years ago, we had reports all over the national news about massive flooding in San Antonio, just down the road from me. I was heading there to visit my brothers anyway, so I was kinda worried about what I was going to run into. Problem is, I couldn't find ANY signs of that "massive flooding" ANYWHERE. News made it sound like the whole city was underwater, and I couldn't even find a damn puddle! That's when I started to fully realize the sensational, overblown nature of the headlines.
Quote:
Only we don't really know, do we?
Not unless we're there on the scene, it seems.
Quote:
I don't think Obama has to worry about a 'coup' here, though. We've never had one, and I don't think the professional military would support one.
There are those who'd argue that we DID undergo a coup here in November 1963. Just sayin'...
Quote:
And, while I don't like Obama and his socialist agenda, I haven't seen anything he's done that would rate a 'coup', lol. I know he's broken campaign promises, and lots of people are making hay over that, but good grief, what politician hasn't lied?
John Edwar- BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHHH...
Sorry. I *TRIED* to keep a straight face while saying that.
It just can't be done.Quote:
It isNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wednesday, July 1, 2009 10:10 PM
Hey! I LIKE guayabera shirts....I am a skinny,5'8",150 ponder;and I can make a 6 inch GP100 DISAPPEAR when I "dress around my gear"(LOL!)....
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wednesday, July 1, 2009 10:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by gripper:
Hey! I LIKE guayabera shirts....I am a skinny,5'8",150 ponder;and I can make a 6 inch GP100 DISAPPEAR when I "dress around my gear"(LOL!)....
Oh, I'm sure you can still find guayaberas - they'll just be made in the Dominican Republic, or El Salvador, or Mexico, or...
How do you like the grip angle on the GP100? It looks to me like the grip would be uncomfortable. I'm partial to the trusty old Super Blackhawk myself.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thursday, July 2, 2009 5:38 PM
You should have seen me when th epersonal armsroom was better stocked-I used to have an old 5.5 inch Redhawk in .357(mainly a platform for "warm " handloads);but oddly enough th eGP carried well for me(after market grips.however-rubber tends to print on my clothing).
I am oneof those skinny,wiry guys with very strong forearms and back-as a result my clothing (when I dress comfy!) tends to hang on me in a rather convenient way.Knives-same difference-I can carry a fairly sizeable neck knife(4.5 inch blade) and not print on anything heavier than a T shirt as well).
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thursday, July 2, 2009 8:19 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
Originally posted by badkarma00:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
I can't understand why the press, or the Obama Administration, or the ever useless UN are all calling this a coup and condemning it, let alone demanding that Zelaya be returned to power. If CNN's story is correct, then all that's happened is that Zelaya tried a Hugo Chavez type 'President for Life' move, and got smacked for it.
They're calling it a military coup because that's typically what you call it when the military deposes a leader and either takes over the country itself or installs a new leader. The term "military coup" has negative connotations, but that doesn't mean it's ALWAYS a bad thing - occasionally the country is better off for it, especially if the military clears out a corrupt government and paves the way for legitimate elections to take place.
'Course, Obama's not playing ball because he realizes that something similar could happen here, and he doesn't want any part of seeming to support such actions. :)Quote:
The story says that the Supreme Court ruled Zelaya's actions unconstitutional, and that the military refused to act on Zelaya's orders.
If only we could have been so lucky at some point in the last 8 years...
Mike
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
-----------------
Well, the difference is, that Zelaya was trying to extend his presidency in violation of the constitution. Bush, for all his faults, and as a Republican I will say there were many, never tried something like that.
Never? "Enhanced Interrogation"? Warrantless wiretaps? Extraordinary rendition? Those all sound constitutional to you?Quote:
I agree with you though about the title, and the conotations. It's not always a bad thing. I can't understand the uproar, though, considering that the civilian government, again sans ex-president wanna be for life, is in charge rather than the military.
Agreed. It looks like this might be the rare occasion when the military stepped in, took control of the situation, ousted a president who was trying to do something unconstitutional, and then handed control back to the LEGITIMATE civilian authorities. And I reiterate: We should have been so lucky at any time in the last 8 years. And we may need that kind of luck in the next 4 or more... not that I think we'll get any help at all out of these milquetoasts.Quote:
You ever feel like a mushroom when you see the news? Kept in the dark and fed a lot of $hit? I know I do. Maybe our problem is that we've become so used to having worldwide news at our beckon call, knowing everything that happens, everywhere.
Yes! A few years ago, we had reports all over the national news about massive flooding in San Antonio, just down the road from me. I was heading there to visit my brothers anyway, so I was kinda worried about what I was going to run into. Problem is, I couldn't find ANY signs of that "massive flooding" ANYWHERE. News made it sound like the whole city was underwater, and I couldn't even find a damn puddle! That's when I started to fully realize the sensational, overblown nature of the headlines.Quote:
Only we don't really know, do we?
Not unless we're there on the scene, it seems.Quote:
I don't think Obama has to worry about a 'coup' here, though. We've never had one, and I don't think the professional military would support one.
There are those who'd argue that we DID undergo a coup here in November 1963. Just sayin'...Quote:
And, while I don't like Obama and his socialist agenda, I haven't seen anything he's done that would rate a 'coup', lol. I know he's broken campaign promises, and lots of people are making hay over that, but good grief, what politician hasn't lied?
John Edwar- BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHHH...
Sorry. I *TRIED* to keep a straight face while saying that.NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thursday, July 2, 2009 8:38 PM
The Wages of Chavismo
The Honduran coup is a reaction to Chávez's rule by the mob.
Quote:
As military "coups" go, the one this weekend in Honduras was strangely, well, democratic. The military didn't oust President Manuel Zelaya on its own but instead followed an order of the Supreme Court. It also quickly turned power over to the president of the Honduran Congress, a man from the same party as Mr. Zelaya. The legislature and legal authorities all remain intact.
We mention these not so small details because they are being overlooked as the world, including the U.S. President, denounces tiny Honduras in a way that it never has, say, Iran. President Obama is joining the U.N., Fidel Castro, Hugo Chávez and other model democrats in demanding that Mr. Zelaya be allowed to return from exile and restored to power. Maybe it's time to sort the real from the phony Latin American democrats.
[Review & Outlook] Associated Press
People against the return of ousted Honduras President Manuel Zelaya participate in a rally at the central park in Tegucigalpa, Tuesday, June 30, 2009.
The situation is messy, and we think the Hondurans would have been smarter -- and better off -- not sending Mr. Zelaya into exile at dawn. Mr. Zelaya was pressing ahead with a nonbinding referendum to demand a constitutional rewrite to let him seek a second four-year term. The attorney general and Honduran courts declared the vote illegal and warned he'd be prosecuted if he followed through. Mr. Zelaya persisted, even leading a violent mob last week to seize and distribute ballots imported from Venezuela. However, the proper constitutional route was to impeach Mr. Zelaya and then arrest him for violating the law.
Yet the events in Honduras also need to be understood in the context of Latin America's decade of chavismo. Venezuela's Hugo Chávez was democratically elected in 1998, but he has since used every lever of power, legal and extralegal, to subvert democracy. He first ordered a rewrite of the constitution that allowed his simple majority in the national assembly grant him the power to rule by decree for one year and to control the judiciary.
In 2004 he packed the Supreme Court with 32 justices from 20. Any judge who rules against his interests can be fired. He made the electoral tribunal that oversees elections his own political tool, denying opposition requests to inspect voter rolls and oversee vote counts. The once politically independent oil company now hires only Chávez allies, and independent television stations have had their licenses revoked.
Mr. Chávez has also exported this brand of one-man-one-vote-once democracy throughout the region. He's succeeded to varying degrees in Ecuador, Bolivia, Argentina and Nicaragua, where his allies have stretched the law and tried to dominate the media and the courts. Mexico escaped in 2006 when Felipe Calderón linked his leftwing opponent to chavismo and barely won the presidency.
In Honduras Mr. Chávez funneled Veneuzelan oil money to help Mr. Zelaya win in 2005, and Mr. Zelaya has veered increasingly left in his four-year term. The Honduran constitution limits presidents to a single term, which is scheduled to end in January. Mr. Zelaya was using the extralegal referendum as an act of political intimidation to force the Congress to allow a rewrite of the constitution so he could retain power. The opposition had pledged to boycott the vote, which meant that Mr. Zelaya would have won by a landslide.
Such populist intimidation has worked elsewhere in the region, and Hondurans are understandably afraid that, backed by Chávez agents and money, it could lead to similar antidemocratic subversion there. In Tegucigalpa yesterday, thousands demonstrated against Mr. Zelaya, and new deputy foreign minister Marta Lorena Casco told the crowd that "Chávez consumed Venezuela, then Bolivia, after that Ecuador and Nicaragua, but in Honduras that didn't happen."
It's no accident that Mr. Chávez is now leading the charge to have Mr. Zelaya reinstated, and on Monday the Honduran travNOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME