Relax....I don't think HR 645 hasn't passed .....yet.
Hugo Chavez: Glaring example of Socialist FAIL!
- Thread starter Dixie - In Memoriam
- Start date
Relax....I don't think HR 645 hasn't passed .....yet.
christiefan915
Catalyst
It was bullshit because there was NEVER a continuing threat to the U.S. by Iraq. And by "accomplishing US goals", does that mean getting our hands on the oil?
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
I've seen my share of Bush apologists on this board, but you're something else. You're probably Jeb.
Again - nothing about the resolution recommended force, and nothing about it mandated force. It was Bush's decision that started the war, and is 100% responsible for the war.
Too bad.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Again, you want to run away from an honest discussion and pretend that facts are "beliefs" we can choose to have, or not to have.
Every book I've read on Socialism, has at it's very core, the equal distribution of wealth, as a primary objective and purpose. Are you denying this because you truly don't believe this is a tenant of Socialism, or because you'll just bow up and lie about anything to avoid acknowledgement and critique of the facts?
Basic economic decisions, as well as political decisions, must reflect the common good. The entire economy should operate for the good of the entire society, with no one left behind.
No private concentrations of capital or other wealth, and no other types of private concentrations of power.
The end of money's domination over society. The end of the priority of property and private greed.
Socialism will complete what democracy began-- the transfer of sovereignty in all spheres from elites to the people.
"Communal ownership of land and capital."
No private concentrations of capital or other wealth, and no other types of private concentrations of power.
The end of money's domination over society. The end of the priority of property and private greed.
Socialism will complete what democracy began-- the transfer of sovereignty in all spheres from elites to the people.
"Communal ownership of land and capital."
--Bertrand Russell in Roads to Freedom.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Only, Chavez had a billion dollars the non-elites didn't have. What happened to the system?
Bush started the war ?....actually Bush ended the war.....
Clinton was bombing Baghdad in 1993, killing Iraqi civilians by the score......
then again in 1998......almost 20 cruise missiles was it ?....I don't remember the number....bombing the shit out of towns and villages....quite a lot of sheep if I
remember too.....
Oh, but this wasn't war to you was it....a US president bombing another sovereign country is just, just, ....well, I don't know exactly what YOU call it.....
but to normal people, its warfare....you seem to be obsessed with the notion that you must have a soldier on the ground with a neat uniform and boots to call it war.....
you're idea of war is like it was the 1776 or 1864 ...or at least 1939..........
you're a moron
It wasn't socialism.
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
Called it.
Now, there just isn't enough credit to go around. I have heard bravo say that Clinton actually started the war (when he's not saying that it only lasted 3 weeks), and that all Bush did was finish it, and only when Congressional Democrats forced him to. Crazy stuff.
Just where did you hear that ?.....You really don't understand what you read do you......how very sad....sad and pathetic.
poor Thingy1....
Either that or you're a pathological liar....I'll assume the former .
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
You just said it 2 posts ago, dumbo.
Really ?.....If the word "started" shows up on your screen, I'd say you have a computer problem....cause it just ain't there....
You don't know much about the history of our ongoing, armed conflict (war), with Iraq do you....say about starting with the invasion of Kuwait...
maybe you were too young to grasp the events of that long ago....
Last edited:
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Right! And this is the really FUN part of being a Socialist, when it completely fails, you can claim it obviously wasn't Socialism! This enables you to brag and crow about the wonderful Socialist policies which improved the lives of so many, but whenever the wealth of Chavez is brought up... he wasn't really a Socialist, (but he was, because he instituted Socialist policies), but not really.
You morons are fucking amazing!
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Run away my ass. Your arguments are simply stupid and you don't have a clue about what you're talking.
First, what fucking "fail" are you talking about? The lives of the Venezuelan people have been exponentially improved under Chavez .. and I posted measures of that improvement THAT YOU DIDN'T EVEN TOUCH.
Don't talk that dumb shit to me about running away.
Socialism is about a more equitable distribution of wealth and resources .. it is not about "equal" distribution. Do you know the difference?
I'm a socialist .. you're just some guy that read a book and now claims to be an expert.
If you want respect from your posts you'd best figure out how to give it.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
But YES I did! I clearly pointed out, the Venezuelan people are better off since the discovery of huge oil reserves. Because that happened while Chavez was there, doesn't mean Chavez automatically gets credit. We have no idea how much MORE improved their lives would have been under a Capitalist who promoted free market enterprise. My guess is, they would be markedly better off, because capitalists can make more money in a free market capitalist society than a non-elite in a socialist society.
Then stop running away.
Oh that's rich. Why would anyone give a shit about more equitable distribution, if equality were not the objective? It's like claiming a football team is about gaining yardage and not about winning the game! But that silly denial of fact aside, where in the fuck was this "equitable distribution" regarding the billion dollars Chavez had? Sounds to me like, the only person it was "equitable" for was Chavez!
Oh NO...You mean all these big star Democrats are liars.....????
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." --
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by: -- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them." --
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." --
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." --
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." --
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." --
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." --
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" --
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." --
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
Cancel 2016.11
Darla
Bravo I liked it better when you decorated your posts with blue. You should mix it up, get a little more creative, I think red and blue make purple? Try that. Easter is coming up and in fact I am going to be doing some pretty fancy (egg) decorating myself since I am having my nieces and nephew over for dinner. You should use a little glitter too.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
First, you're wrong. Oil was the biggest industry under Perez .. before Chavez.
Capitalists make more money for themselves. Common people are near meaningless.
History has GLARING examples of what capitalists do and have done throughout Latin America for centuries.
Carlos Andres Perez was that example in Venezuela. He was bought off by the IMF and the World Bank .. capitalists. The common Venezuelan suffered. Chavez was ELECTED as president .. and the Venezuelan people are better off.
Batista is that example in Cuba. The mafia ruled the country and Cuban women in 'donkey shows' was a popular tourist attraction .. which is why the CUBAN PEOPLE got rid of him. The Cuban people are exponentially better off.
Running away from what? Sorry to inform you but your arguments are not that difficult and are seriously unlearned.
I asked you what fail? You didn't answer.
You claim that Chavez is a glaring example of socialism fail .. where is it? Is it in your claim that Venezuelans might be better off under capitalism? That's your fail when history tells a different story>
That's your claim when capitalism is failing in your own country?
:0)
You prove the limitations of your own mind. You look for an argument you can challenge rather than engage in an honest discussion and debate on the subject .. which is why I have no real interest in talking to meme people. What's the point?
You're talking to a socialist .. demanding that you know more about socialism than I do.
Socialism: Socialism is an economic system characterized by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy. "Social ownership" may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership, or citizen ownership of equity. There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them. They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets or planning, how management is to be organized within productive institutions, and the role of the state in constructing socialism.
A socialist economic system would consist of a system of production and distribution organized to directly satisfy economic demands and human needs, so that goods and services would be produced directly for use instead of for private profit driven by the accumulation of capital. Accounting would be based on physical quantities, a common physical magnitude, or a direct measure of labor-time in place of financial calculation. Distribution would be based on the principle to each according to his contribution.
Democratic socialism seeks to establish socialism through democratic processes and propagate its ideals within the context of a democratic political system.
I'm a democratic socialist. Point out where it says that everybody gets the same.
You don't know what you're talking about and still claim to be an expert.
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
The Dixie Dunce rides again....with a severly compromised "source" like Wikipedia by his side to support his never ending ass-backwards supposition and conjecture.
Ride, Dixie, ride!