Massage Adagio
Montreal Escorts

Hugo Chavez R.I.P. (1954-2013)

May 28, 2012
397
0
0
It's hard not to look at both his successes and weaknesses. Frankly, I think propaganda didn't really portray him accurately. RIP
 

Doc Holliday

Hopelessly horny
Sep 27, 2003
19,290
717
113
Canada
I agree with the both of you.

If we had a "Hugo Chavez" ruling our respective countries, we'd likely be better off. Chavez has been a godsend to the poor people of his country, using $$ gained from oil exports to help their cause. He was extremely generous and caring towards his people, no one can argue about that.

Rarely does a head of State's death bother me, but i must admit that Hugo Chavez' recent death from cancer did in fact trouble me. Thank God he is no longer suffering from that awful, deadlly disease.

I just read that he will be permanently exposed in a glass casket, similar to Vladimir Lenin:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/08/world/americas/venezuela-chavez-embalming/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
 

RobinX

Member
Aug 30, 2009
452
0
16
Montreal
Hugo Chavez: Champion of the poor, RIP

I agree as well. Hugo Chavez was indeed a champion of the poor. Here is an article which sums up his dedication to the poor of Venezuela and his accomplishments:

Hugo Chavez fulfilled his vow to Venezuela’s poor.

Here are some relevant extracts from the article:

Chavez’s leadership has altered the political balance not only in Venezuela but also in Latin America. He “changed Venezuela in fundamental ways, empowering and energizing millions of poor people who had felt marginalized and excluded.”

Both the OAS and the United Nations Development Program affirm that Venezuela’s overall poverty rate dropped from 49% in 1998 (when Chavez was first elected president) to 27% in 2011

Venezuela also met its Millennium Development Goal target for education. Moreover, the UN rated his country among the nations with a high level of human development. And, a Gallup Poll (according to the Washington Post), ranked Venezuela as the “5th most happy country” alongside Finland.

Definitively, Chavez fulfilled his vow to empower and improve the lives of the poor.
 

cloudsurf

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2003
4,948
2,201
113
The type of socialism that Chavez practised does not work....just ask the Chinese.

If you take from the rich to give to the poor then eventually no one will want to work and the economy suffers...just as its doing now in his country.

Yes he was charismatic and a firebrand....but he was also a dictator who didn`t tolerate dissent at home and made friends with some of the most barbaric rulers on this planet (includinig Saddam and Kaddafi).

A hero to some....but not to those who believe in democracy.
 

nuprin001

Member
Jun 8, 2008
40
0
6
>>> Post not deleted because I feel the discussion is important BUT... This was a textbook example of a USELESS quote and the entire post should have been deleted with no warnings. Mod 11. <<<

Yup.

Read what everyone is saying. He "gave" to the poor. That is the most dangerous thing you can do. Dangerous to the country, yes, but also incredibly dangerous to the poor because you're teaching them that being poor is an advantage. Being poor gets you stuff. Worse: voting a certain way gets you stuff. Not that we're not seeing that around the world anyway.

Venezuela is worse off today than when Chavez took office. All the "givemes" that the poor have received under him have cost Venezuela a lot of its future. Venezuela is an oil exporting nation that has gone backwards economically at a time when oil prices have skyrocketed. That is Hugo Chavez's legacy.

Santa Claus makes a shitty president. Parents who spoil their children for not doing anything are shitty parents, and produce shitty kids. Look for Venezuela to keep falling in world economic rankings.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Doc Holliday

Hopelessly horny
Sep 27, 2003
19,290
717
113
Canada
He was also a dictator who didn`t tolerate dissent at home and made friends with some of the most barbaric rulers on this planet (includinig Saddam and Kaddafi).

I disagree & it appears that you've been a victim of the typical American right-wing propaganda machine.

Chavez was democratically elected by his people. He was no dictator. Yes, he did associate with some questionable characters, but this is no different than Canada associating with Cuba or the US associating with Saudi Arabia, among many others. You say that Chavez associated with Saddam and Ghadaffi. So did the US at one point when it was advantageous to their cause. As a matter-of-fact, Saddam Hussein was an ally of the US throughout the 80's as he battled Iran. Heck, the US are the ones who supplied him with chemical weapons, which he later used on his own people.

The US were also long-time supporters of the Anwar Saddat & Hosni Mubarak regimes in Egypt, and do i need to add the Shah of Iran, who murdered & brutalized his own citizens through his secret police. They've been long-time supporters of the Hussein dictatorships in Jordan, as well as the ones in Kuwait and other arab countries. Same thing with many regimes in Central & South America. The US seems to have had the knack throughout its 20th century history of supporting the wrong side in those respective country's civil wars (Nicaragua, El Salvador, etc). It even caused some. But that's another story, another topic.

Chavez' hands are not clean. Neither is Canada's and most importantly the US, who i might add also supported one of history's most brutal dictators in Gen. Augusto Pinnochet of Chile. The list is a long one. Very long, unfortunately.
 

nuprin001

Member
Jun 8, 2008
40
0
6
>>> Post not deleted because I feel the discussion is important BUT... This was a textbook example of a USELESS quote and the entire post should have been deleted with no warnings.
Nuprin, you stop that or your posts will get deleted. Mod 11. <<<


Was he elected? Yes. Was he democratically elected?

Not so much.

"Democratically elected" assumes that there's something approaching a level playing field. Do you deny that Chavez routinely arrested reporters who spoke out against him? That Chavez closed down TV stations and other media outlets that disagreed with his policies? A basic assumption of a democratic election is a free press and free speech. Neither of which was assumable under Chavez.

Was Chavez a dictator? No. But he was well on his way in that direction.

As for Mubarak et al, has anyone on this board excused them? Has anyone proclaimed Mubarak and his ilk "heroes" or mourned their death on this board?

The only person I see excusing the suppression of free speech, the suppression of a free press, and mourning the death of a man well on the path to dictatorship...

is you.

Hugo Chavez was a demagogue. Plain and simple, nothing more and nothing less. You believed in what he was selling. Good for you. That just means you're buying into Brand X while decrying Brand Y. You're choosing McDonald's over Burger King, but not paying any attention to the fact that you're just buying into a different flavor of demagoguery. You're better than that. Or you should be, at least.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Doc Holliday

Hopelessly horny
Sep 27, 2003
19,290
717
113
Canada
Sounds like you also might be referring to George W. Bush, who was NOT democratically elected & who's administration was also responsible for many civil rights violations similar to the ones you mentionned. But that's another story.

The Great Hugo Chavez. He made his mark in history. He will be missed my millions. God bless his soul.
 

nuprin001

Member
Jun 8, 2008
40
0
6
>>> Post not deleted because I feel the discussion is important BUT... This was a textbook example of a USELESS quote and the entire post should have been deleted with no warnings.
Nuprin, you stop that or your posts will get deleted. Mod 11. <<<


"Bbbbut that other guy was a bad guy!!!!"

Where did I say anything that suggested I support, or have ever supported, GWB?

At this point, you're just trolling. There's no way you can be this dumb.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

amazona

Member
Jul 23, 2006
761
2
18
well said he was a great leader and he had enough balls to to stand for any country did not like his way of taking care of his country and his people.R.I.P.
 

RobinX

Member
Aug 30, 2009
452
0
16
Montreal
The type of socialism that Chavez practised does not work....just ask the Chinese.
If you take from the rich to give to the poor then eventually no one will want to work and the economy suffers...
cloudsurf,
If you are going to use an analogy to make a point, in this case referring to China, make sure that you are informed about the subject. Otherwise, it weakens your argument and it makes it appear that you know little about neither China nor Chavez. To start with, here is some reading on the Chinese work ethic and the economy of China:

 

cloudsurf

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2003
4,948
2,201
113
Robin
I should have clarrified...I was referring to the Chinese economy under Mao.
They have come a long way since....economically that is.

BTW thanks for the links but I have to get ready for my date.
Maybe I`ll do some reading on my next trip to Shanghai.
 

Grosbaton

Banned
Oct 11, 2012
264
0
0
the best I can get
The type of socialism that Chavez practised does not work....just ask the Chinese.

If you take from the rich to give to the poor then eventually no one will want to work and the economy suffers...just as its doing now in his country.

Yes he was charismatic and a firebrand....but he was also a dictator who didn`t tolerate dissent at home and made friends with some of the most barbaric rulers on this planet (includinig Saddam and Kaddafi).

A hero to some....but not to those who believe in democracy.

yes yes... so if I follow your narrow mind theory, when a rich customer gives a few hundred dollars to a rather poor sp, he is spoiling her...
Talking about Chavez, you just have to look at the crowds attending his funerals to realize how much he was loved. If Harper dies tomorrow, I am not sure the same will happen! Well, I hope not!
 

busty_asians

New Member
Dec 10, 2012
50
0
0
are you guys serious? chavez was one of the most corrupt leaders and intimidated anybody that opposed him. really pathetic that you guys think he was a great leader. are kim jong il and fidel castro great leaders for kicking out multinationals also?
 
May 28, 2012
397
0
0
chavez was one of the most corrupt leaders and intimidated anybody that opposed him. really pathetic that you guys think he was a great leader.

Not everything is as black and white as the press sometimes illustrates. Looking at the overall results of his tenure, it's evident that a large portion of his popluation was satisfied with his actions. Did the Western World like him? Not always. The only concretely negative thing I can say about him is that I questioned his choice of friends sometime. I can think of many other (and closer) corrupt leaders in our midst. Politician = Corruption = Money. One of the steady computations of the world, just like E=MC Squared.....LOL
 

Merlot

Banned
Nov 13, 2008
4,117
0
0
Visiting Planet Earth
To answer your question: Yes, Fidel Castro was a great leader. Here is some reading on his legacy:
- Cuba’s Achievements under the Presidency of Fidel Castro: The Top Ten

You're kidding, right?

"I have always been impressed at the professionalism of many Cuban citizens that I have known over the years since 1990. In the face of huge declines in the purchasing power of their incomes, they continued to work seriously and with dedication in medicine, the Universities, the schools, the public service, or other employment".

Reading these 10 points it looks like basic health, education, and living conditions have improved quite a bit, but there was a negative pay off for hard work and professional achievement due to Castro's international relations choices that has barely recovered from the loss of Soviet subsidies. Is it supposed to be impressive that good things were accomplished by a leader whose nation has made gains almost entirely as a gross dependent of a now defunct dictatorship and stagnated without it.

As for Chavez, after reading busty_asians last night I withdrew my post to check their assertions. Sure Chavez has made a lot of improvements overall in the quality of life, but now leaves an authoritarian legacy by seizing control of the court system, possibly laying the basis of an enduring reliance on dictatorship.

These two men seem to have provided some benefits by negative methods that won't be sustained without the debilitating impact of strict authoritarian/dictatorial government control. This is not what being "great" is.

:(

Merlot
 
Toronto Escorts