NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.yahoo.com/s/805364

Well there goes my 2.93 gas prices :(

CARACAS, Venezuela - President Hugo Chavez on Sunday threatened to cut off oil sales to the United States in an "economic war" if Exxon Mobil Corp. wins court judgments to seize billions of dollars in Venezuelan assets.

The problem though is that the case is in three courts in three different nations and it was not even the US that froze the assets. It was a British Court that did that.

What an attention whore. Seriously, Chavez, STFU and HTFU or GTFO.

God I love that man.

Rite...

Mr. Chavez, at least make your threats not totally lollible.

Chavez I think is just being an attention whore, if the guy was serious about socialism he would stop talking and starting expropriating....

God I love that man.

Man? More like overgrown little boy.

Seriously, what else can you call a person with etiquette and conduct befitting a five-year-old? Sometimes I think he craves huge amounts of attention to compensation for his smallness in other areas.

Isn't this like trying to hurt the mayor of a town because one of the town's citizens robbed a bank in another town? What the hell? Chavez must have eaten fail for breakfast because he's made of it.

Well, Chavez could stop exports to the United States....But if he did I'm pretty sure Venezuela's economy would tank...

CARACAS, Venezuela - President Hugo Chavez on Sunday threatened to cut off oil sales to the United States in an "economic war" if Exxon Mobil Corp. wins court judgments to seize billions of dollars in Venezuelan assets.Poor Exxon Corp. I think I am going to send them a 20$ charity to help them out :p

Well, Chavez could stop exports to the United States....But if he did I'm pretty sure Venezuela's economy would tank...

If he does, we both lose though.

Chavez is the ultimate left-opportunist, he constantly blames the yankies for everything, he claims to be a 'socialist' yet the Venezuelan elite still continue to exploit the people, live in their Caracas high rises, etc etc. Even if Chavez was smart he'd realize that his real reactionary enemy (at the moment) is domestic, I mean has he forgotten the attempted coup against him?

So Chavez is a noisy dumbass. What else is new?

Well, Chavez could stop exports to the United States....But if he did I'm pretty sure Venezuela's economy would tank...

or, you know, he could sell that oil to china which would grab it up in a second. Which is the point. We can moan and whine about Chavez all we want, we can laugh at his actions and say how it won't work.

But he has oil.

Does anyone here really think he'll have a hard time selling it to other countries?

Actually, Exxon would only be taking its own stuff back. Remember when he changed the terms of the deal to produce oil in Venezuela and kicked everyone out who didn't agree to them?

Well, Exxon went to the International Chamber of Commerce and other institutions that you go to when you think an international contract is being violated. The facts of the case are fairly straightforward, so the decision should be that Exxon will be able to extract its investments properly without financing Hugo's next spending spree.

Now he's just throwing a tantrum, wishing it was still the fifties when a government could pull that sort of stunt and expect no resistance. I say we call him on it.

Does anyone here really think he'll have a hard time selling it to other countries?
Not necessarily. But then he'll have lost his only bargaining chip when talking to the US.

Not necessarily. But then he'll have lost his only bargaining chip when talking to the US.

but then what, exactly, does he want from us other than a market?

Venezuela's oil exports amount to 15% of America's oil needs, the question I suppose then is could the US or Venezuela replace that if trade was cancelled between them. I suppose Venezuela could just sell it to China, I am sure they'd pay the same and their desperate for it these days. I suppose also the US would have to convince OPEC to increase supply to replace said downfall.

Speaking of Venezuela, I am going there this summer. Anyone want a souvenir? Maybe a barrel of oil for the scrapbook?

Speaking of Venezuela, I am going there this summer. Anyone want a souvenir? Maybe a barrel of oil for the scrapbook?
Red Barret?

Venezuela's oil exports amount to 15% of America's oil needs, the question I suppose then is could the US or Venezuela replace that if trade was cancelled between them. I suppose Venezuela could just sell it to China, I am sure they'd pay the same and their desperate for it these days. I suppose also the US would have to convince OPEC to increase supply to replace said downfall.

OPEC is already near capacity, they cant push it, the ebil moslims wont be able to give you any more

If he doesn't sell it to anybody, he goes broke and his little experiment gets flushed down the drain. If he sells it to somebody else, the oil market just gets reshuffled a little and after a brief disruption virtually no meaningful benefits will be obtained other than destroying any potential influence Chavez possessed over the US.

riiiight. Keep telling yourself that the US can lose 15% of its oil imports and recover after "just a little reshuffle".

Right now there is more global demand for oil than there is supply. More to point, people keep talking about him "losing influence over the US". If there really is no concern over his oil, then he really has no influence, does he? Either we need his oil, or we don't. If we don't, he really doesn't have any meaningful influence. If we do, then him taking it elsewhere would be harmful to our economy.

If he doesn't sell it to anybody, he goes broke and his little experiment gets flushed down the drain. If he sells it to somebody else, the oil market just gets reshuffled a little and after a brief disruption virtually no meaningful benefits will be obtained other than destroying any potential influence Chavez possessed over the US.

OPEC is already near capacity, they cant push it, the ebil moslims wont be able to give you any more
I am actually inclined to agree, alot of people constantly speculate that OPEC purposely drives down supply while demand rises to get a higher price, but no one really seems to look into the fact that maybe the Arabs are running out of reserves, and that they can't maintain said supply. The US has been in peak-oil denial for quite some time now.

Also, Chavez could be doing the US a favor, after the Arab oil embargo and the economic crisis, the US majority went into investing into alternate renewable sources, but as global conditions stabilized they got lured back into the oil market because it was cheaper than water.

http://www.yahoo.com/s/805364

Well there goes my 2.93 gas prices :(Get a bike.

Come on, All people with oil give it to me. I shall drop them to the USA's pitiful forest and burn them. Kill the JEWS, hahaha!!!

:sarcasm.//

........remind me why US buys oil from Venezuela............

http://www.yahoo.com/s/805364

Well there goes my 2.93 gas prices :(


Soon you'll get EU standards too. 1,384 € for gasoline, 1,350 € for diesel this morning here. And I mean per litre!

but then what, exactly, does he want from us other than a market?
Come on, haven't you noticed yet? A big, big part of this "Bolevarianism" is just nationalism in opposition to the Americans and their supposed "puppet oligarchs". He's the people's protection against the US, but to retain that status he has to keep landing what he sells to the electorate as blows.

Of course he's an attention whore...but he's got his reasons.

Keep telling yourself that the US can lose 15% of its oil imports and recover after "just a little reshuffle".
The US wouldn't lose it from one day to the next. There are futures contracts, storages, long-term supply contracts and so on and so forth.

Even Hugo can't suddenly get out of contracts, all he could do is make sure that no new ones are made. That means he loses out on money at the same rate the Americans lose out on oil. The Chinese aren't desperate enough to disregard common sense - they'll know perfectly well that they're the only realistic buyer to take up the shortfall, and they're not gonna go easy. You can expect the new prices to be lower than the ones he's currently charging the Americans - especially because he can't stop giving oil away as political gifts, that's his first instinct when it comes to these things.

And if they really wanted to, the Americans could just go to Nigeria and help the government clean up the delta.

Soon you'll get EU standards too. 1,384 € for gasoline, 1,350 € for diesel this morning here. And I mean per litre!
Most of that is taxes though.

NL, he's a head of state, he can do whatever he wants.

Chaves...attention whore...what everyone else has already said...

NL, he's a head of state, he can do whatever he wants.
I'm afraid governments too have their obligations.

Sure, if it all comes down to it he's got guns and Exxon would have to buy them first, but if it came to that he'd already have lost more than he could possibly gain from it.

Much like Putin's warning of an arms race, I suspect this is nothing more than showboating to encourage domestic support against an imagined outside threat (of course, certain Western leaders are also guilty of such populist moves). In fact, this is one of a number of similarities between the leader of Venezuela and Russia, such as the use of price controls to whip up support in an important election year. The key difference is that Putin is an intelligent and highly astute politician who will most likely win the coming 'election', and Chavez is a clown who lost his attempt to secure his position.

if Cuba-Venezuela-Russia-China-North Korea-other communist/anti USA entities allied against the "Beacon of Freedom, the Holy Empire of North America", will it be the world war 4? Or Cold War 2?



PS: I should've make a split thread, but it seemed it still belong here...

Face it, China earns too much thanks to the US of A, Russia can't really do a thing and the rest is just laughable - there's no threat from them.

Face it, China earns too much thanks to the US of A, Russia can't really do a thing and the rest is just laughable - there's no threat from them.Not militarily, but their stranglehold on resources is growing. And the power that affords will increase over the next few decades.

Use the easy way. Just blockade the Malacca strait. They will cry and send their puny (I mean terribly... strong!) armies here...

Most of that is taxes though.

Yes, ranging from about 58% in France to 53% in Italy (surprisingly, in Italy we have lower taxes on petrol than most of the largest EU countries... still the prices are higher here :confused:)

Speaking of Venezuela, I am going there this summer. Anyone want a souvenir? Maybe a barrel of oil for the scrapbook?

Advise? Buy rum.

Pretty good and cheap here. Ridiculous expensive in other countries.

We don't really sell oil barrels, and plus, its export is forbidden by any other party than the estate. :P

Send me some rum!!
rum rum rum rum....
the roman empire!

I said Bolollol

:D

Fie on you, OceanDrive2.

Wait -- doesn't Chavez, or any other national leader, have the right to decide where they sell their own natural resources? I believe I know the answer to this question, but I ask it anyway in case I'm somehow mistaken.

Chaves...attention whore...what everyone else has already said...I said Bolollol

:D

Wait -- doesn't Chavez, or any other national leader, have the right to decide where they sell their own natural resources? I believe I know the answer to this question, but I ask it anyway in case I'm somehow mistaken.

Yes, he has.

The point is, Can he afford it? Even with the chinese?

Believe me, it is easier to move ships full of oil to Miami or the South Coast of the US than to China, from Venezuela. Geography matters.

That is why the US is the main buyer of venezuelan oil.

Yes, he has.

The point is, Can he afford it? Even with the chinese?

Believe me, it is easier to move ships full of oil to Miami or the South Coast of the US than to China, from Venezuela. Geography matters.

That is why the US is the main buyer of venezuelan oil.

Makes sense.

Chavez always does this. Its almost a quarterly thing.


He's like a spoiled bratty child. Stop giving him attention and he'll stfu.

Fie on you, OceanDrive2.Investopedia Says:

Setting up an Fie is a common method of creating an operation in Asian countries, especially in China. In China, any one of a number of legal entities can be considered FIEs including equity joint ventures (EJV), cooperative joint ventures (CJV), wholly-owned foreign enterprises (WFOE) and foreign-invested companies limited by shares (FCLS).
www.investopedia.com/

I ll take an apple CJV please :D

Venezuela .. kicked everyone out who didn't agree to (the law)100% legal.

Chavez always does this. Its almost a quarterly thing.


He's like a spoiled bratty child. Stop giving him attention and he'll stfu.

Not really. Tried that before. Didn't work.

100% legal.

So was what Robert Mugabe did with the farms in Zimbabwe. And Chaves will probably be about as successful if he tries.

So was what Robert Mugabe did with the farms in Zimbabwe. And Chaves will probably be about as successful if he tries.

Not the same situation. The oil industry was nationalized in Venezuela decades ago, and so far, it has worked. The Exxon and other companies' camps were just the remmanents of foreign industry in that sector in Venezuela.

Nationalization of the oil industry in Venezuela is hardly a "new policy of Chávez". And it has been succesful, so far. I do not object the nationalization policy done over said camps by the current goverment, but their way to do it. It could had been done in easier ways...

People are making an awful lot of assumptions about China's policies and what exactly Venezuela would do if it lost the US as a trading partner. And Chavez's policies have done nothing but cause a brain drain in Venezuela and people that say he's been successful are simply morons.

Personally I wish we had the nerve to break the Venezuelan economy as an example to others, by forcing our trading partners to stop doing business them or we'll call in our loans and do business with others. But the US doesn't have the balls to do that though.



Problem with us calling in our loans is other countries might start calling in theirs. Then we're fucked.

I think we should just let Chavez throw his tantrum. More of a motive to find alternative energy imo.

People are making an awful lot of assumptions about China's actions and what exactly Venezuela would do if it lost the US as a trading partner. And Chavez's policies have done nothing but cause a brain drain in Venezuela and people that say he's been successful are simply morons.

Personally I wish we had the nerve to use our economic clout to break the Venezuelan economy to set an example, but of course we won't.

Personally I wish we had the nerve to use our economic clout to break the Venezuelan economy to set an example, but of course we won't.Like what we did to Cuba?

We cant do it to Venezuela because we have too many Hummers/Hemis/Big-O-engine cars..

Exactly. Except they don't have the Soviet Union to depend completely on, which is what Cuba did. They entirely lived off of charity from abroad. That's Cuba's legacy.

Venezuela has much more of a power base among the opposition than Cuba did though, so I don't think Chavez would stay in power much long if they faced an economic collapse.

Seriously, what else can you call a person with etiquette and conduct befitting a five-year-old?

Going by the last eight years: "Mr. President."

Anyway, I don't really like Chavez, but it's nice to see someone standing up the to U.S.

Nationalization of the oil industry in Venezuela is hardly a "new policy of Chávez". And it has been succesful, so far... people that say he's been successful are simply morons.#1 It has been successful, Aelosia is right.

#2 Aelosia posting history proves she is not a moron, unfortunately I cant say the same for you.

Successful for whom? For Chavez or for the people who will probably have their money devalued for the umpteenth time this month.

Its strange to see people rooting for the shaking of the US economy...considering the US is a major part of the world's economy, if the US tanks, everyone hurts. You all know Im not a lover of the US, Im just trying to point this out.

And say what you want about China being able to take our place if we tank, but as of right now the Chinese economy is very dependent on our economy. We buy all their goods and provide their people with a lot of their jobs.


This is the danger of a global economy. When a major player tanks, it hurts everyone.

Yes, he has.

The point is, Can he afford it? Even with the chinese?

Believe me, it is easier to move ships full of oil to Miami or the South Coast of the US than to China, from Venezuela. Geography matters.

That is why the US is the main buyer of venezuelan oil.

No, the US is the main buyer because it is one of the main consumers, period.

Good for Chavez, hope he finds another good market...which he will. In the meantime, the uncertainty his moves cause will rock the already unstable boat of the US economy. Great news for Canadians, because you'll need our Albertain oil even more.

Successful for whom? For Chavez or for the people.both.

for Venezuela and for Chavez.
its his policy, he should get credit for the success (or failure).

People are making an awful lot of assumptions about China's actions and what exactly Venezuela would do if it lost the US as a trading partner. And Chavez's policies have done nothing but cause a brain drain in Venezuela and people that say he's been successful are simply morons.

Personally I wish we had the nerve to use our economic clout to break the Venezuelan economy to set an example, but of course we won't.

Given the current state of your economy, I don't think you could indeed spare the "clout".

As I said before, oil nationalization is not a Chávez's policy, neither is new. Check venezuelan history, please.

His economic policies have been such a big drain because they haven't been implemented right, that's it.

Exactly. Except they don't have the Soviet Union to depend completely on, which is what Cuba did. They entirely lived off of charity from abroad. That's Cuba's legacy.

Venezuela has much more of a power base among the opposition than Cuba did though, so I don't think Chavez would stay in power much long if they faced an economic collapse.

Although I consider Cuba's economic policy to be a joke, they stopped depending on the Soviet Union years ago. And yet they are there, with the same political system (which I consider to be a joke too). They survived. What makes you think Venezuela can't do the same?

Successful for whom? For Chavez or for the people who will probably have their money devalued for the umpteenth time this month.

Last devaluation of the Bolívar was years ago, although the state change control forces that, (and it is also a silly policy in my opinion). So, no, I live here in Venezuela, and no, we didn't have our money devalued for the umpteenth time this month. Find better sources before expressing your opinion.

No, the US is the main buyer because it is one of the main consumers, period.

Good for Chavez, hope he finds another good market...which he will. In the meantime, the uncertainty his moves cause will rock the already unstable boat of the US economy. Great news for Canadians, because you'll need our Albertain oil even more.

No, China is almost as big as a consumer. The Us is the main buyer because it is one of the main consumers, and the closest one. Period.

He will find another market, indeed. However, marketwise, it won't be as good. Transporting that oil there will be indeed a challenge for our distribution system. This is a lose-lose situation indeed, Venezuela will have to drop their oil prices, and the US will see their gas prices skyrocket. Even more, they could suffer from temporary scarcity, given the weak state of their economy. The US loses a lot more than Venezuela, yet two wrongs doesn't make a right, and Venezuela still loses economic perspectives.

You all know Im not a lover of the US.I am a lover... off the US

http://video.movies.go.com/starwatch2000/sites/deucebigalow/assets/main/deuce.jpg

so, I you want to have some deuce, just email me baby.

________________________
Legal disclaimer: offer is for females of legal age, check your local laws.

Even more, they could suffer from temporary scarcity, given the weak state of their economy. The US loses a lot more than Venezuela, yet two wrongs doesn't make a right, and Venezuela still loses economic perspectives.


Honostly our economy is not that weak. Its become a media feeding frenzy and a fear mongering campaign because its growth has slowed. But its still growing.

Honostly our economy is not that weak. Its become a media feeding frenzy and a fear mongering campaign because its growth has slowed. But its still growing.

According to the US standards, it is in a weak state, quoting myself. I didn't say it was weak, I said it was in a weak state, it has an entirely different meaning. Face it, you wouldn't be able to cop with problems as easily as you would in a normal situation. So, you should try to avoid economic complications and problems, not getting into new ones.

Better get the gas masks out. Any more of Chavez's smoke, and I'm likely to get all asthmatic. :D

You mean we should tell the courts to not pay the companies for the property and assets they had stolen from them?

That's the kind of complications we should avoid?

I think I'd much rather be taking the bus, same as I'd rather be dead than convert to Islam or do any of the other things that cause various complications for people when it comes to dealing with the scum of the earth.



.........


You were making sense and actually doing ok until then.

You mean we should tell the courts to not pay the companies for the property and assets they had stolen from them?

That's the kind of complications we should avoid?

I think I'd much rather be taking the bus, same as I'd rather be dead than convert to Islam or do any of the other things that cause various complications for people when it comes to dealing with the scum of the earth.

You mean we should tell the courts to not pay the companies for the property and assets they had stolen from them?

That's the kind of complications we should avoid?

I think I'd much rather be taking the bus, same as I'd rather be dead than convert to Islam or do any of the other things that cause various complications for people when it comes to dealing with the scum of the earth.

If you label muslims as the scum of the Earth, then you are completely wrong. But then I could have gotten that wrong.

Not really, but Exxon should had tried to get a better deal, instead of going all spoiled like, and Chávez should had paid the company a fair amount of money to kick them out happy as the rest of the companies, instead of going all spoiled like. I am not against the demands, actually it seems fair enough, but don't you think that with a bit of better sense from both parties this problem could had been handled much better?

leftists like Chavez who want us all to become insects in the socialist system under them. That's the scum of the earth.

While I am a steadfast opposer of my own president, well, you are going a bit over the fence.

I would say the same thing about the free market policy of "Lower your shields, surrender your ship, you have been globalized" of your country. Yet, I don't think you United Staters are the scum of the earth. Actually, I do reserve that title for terrorists, rapists, Abu Ghraib torturers an so forth.

I'm referring to terrorists who want us to convert or die, or leftists like Chavez who want us all to become insects in the socialist system under them. That's the scum of the earth.

And I don't that Exxon would have taken this to court and risked losing a lot of money if they didn't think they weren't being robbed.

Yet, I don't think you United Staters are the scum of the earth. Actually, I do reserve that title for terrorists, rapists, Abu Ghraib torturers an so forth.


;)

A little piece of sarcasm to show that the scum of the Earth appears in any civilization, culture or background. Islam or not, western or eastern, you can always find a little piece of sewer material anywhere.

No, China is almost as big as a consumer. The Us is the main buyer because it is one of the main consumers, and the closest one. Period.China is the second (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0922041.html) largest consumer of crude oil. Nonetheless, the US imports 20.59 million barrels of oil a day compared to China's 7.27. That's a substantial way away from ' almost as big a consumer'. The US is the largest consumer in the world, and so far ahead of any other contender, that using the comparison ' almost as big' is nearly meaningless.


The US is #3 (http://www.capp.ca/raw.asp?x=1&dt=PDF&dn=123701) in the world for production of oil and it still can't meet it's own domestic needs. China is the fifth largest producer, and its needs are much, much smaller at this point than those of the US. Canada is poised to become the fourth largest producer of petroleum in the world, and we have a much more politically friendly relationship with the US than Venezuela. We also happen to be closer. It's not much of a stretch to state with certainty that Venezuelan oil will be replaced by Albertan oil. We are already the largest (http://www.capp.ca/raw.asp?x=1&dt=PDF&dn=123158) supplier of oil to the US. Right behind us are Mexico and Saudi Arabia.

He will find another market, indeed. However, marketwise, it won't be as good. Transporting that oil there will be indeed a challenge for our distribution system. This is a lose-lose situation indeed, Venezuela will have to drop their oil prices, and the US will see their gas prices skyrocket. Even more, they could suffer from temporary scarcity, given the weak state of their economy. The US loses a lot more than Venezuela, yet two wrongs doesn't make a right, and Venezuela still loses economic perspectives.

You're right, the other markets won't be as good. It's basically a windfall for Canadians though. Scary...our freaking oil sector is insane as it is.

Honostly our economy is not that weak. Its become a media feeding frenzy and a fear mongering campaign because its growth has slowed. But its still growing.

Unfortunately, fear is a very powerful force when it comes to the stock markets.

:DGoing by the last eight years: "Mr. President."

Anyway, I don't really like Chavez, but it's nice to see someone standing up the to U.S.

China is the second (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0922041.html) largest consumer of crude oil. Nonetheless, the US imports 20.59 million barrels of oil a day compared to China's 7.27. That's a substantial way away from ' almost as big a consumer'. The US is the largest consumer in the world, and so far ahead of any other contender, that using the comparison ' almost as big' is nearly meaningless.

Is almost as big in the sense that it is the next biggest consumer after the US. I do understand the large gap between the two, although. I think the main point about China is that they are not consuming as much but plan to expand their demand pretty soon in the next years.

You're right, the other markets won't be as good. It's basically a windfall for Canadians though. Scary...our freaking oil sector is insane as it is.

And you are right too. Mexico and Canada will benefit from this situation a lot, and will be both great winners. Both US and Venezuela will lose, one more than the other, although

Is almost as big in the sense that it is the next biggest consumer after the US. I do understand the large gap between the two, although. I think the main point about China is that they are not consuming as much but plan to expand their demand pretty soon in the next years. With this, I agree. I was just being pedantic because my neck is sore :D


And you are right too. Mexico and Canada will benefit from this situation a lot, and will be both great winners. Both US and Venezuela will lose, one more than the other, although
Also agreed. It's a sucky situation, but how certain is this?

I would say the same thing about the free market policy of "Lower your shields, surrender your ship, you have been globalized" of your country. Yet, I don't think you United Staters are the scum of the earth. Actually, I do reserve that title for terrorists, rapists, Abu Ghraib torturers an so forth.

My Definition of Scum:
Terrorists: certain memebers of the IDF, USM, AQ
Rapists: read above
Racists: Ron Paul
British/French imperialists
Allawi cultists

Also agreed. It's a sucky situation, but how certain is this?

Chávez has said this like...12 times since he got in power and started foaming about the US.

So, he could be bragging again, or he could be going at it for real, noone but himself knows. Personally, I don't even think that right now, even himself knows.

He knows that even the threat moves influence on the markets, so he knows that with only the menacing attitude he has enough. He's smart enough for that. However, he could go all emotional about it and do it. He has taken such decisions before.

If someone is pretty good for Chávez, it is his impredictability. (spelling?)

Anyway, I don't really like Chavez, but it's nice to see someone standing up the to U.S.

It is, but it's quite possible to do so without acting like a spoiled brat.

Some hobo stole the rear wheel off of my bike, though...it's very sad.

:(

Get a bike.

Some hobo stole the rear wheel off of my bike, though...it's very sad.

Seriously, what else can you call a person with etiquette and conduct befitting a five-year-old?

Mr President?

Chavez always does this. Its almost a quarterly thing.


He's like a spoiled bratty child. Stop giving him attention and he'll stfu.

I agree.

He is not much of a threat, in spite of the attention that he accrues in western media. If we were to merely ignore his tripe, and let him simmer in his own pan all parties involved would be better off. It's not like he's changing Latin America, and Latin American relations with the US, nor is he likely to accrue enough power to do so. His brand of militant, militarist, uncompromising radicalism has not been exported, and even his closest elected allies, such as Morales, don't lead their countries the way he does. We ought to just let him simmer.

Chavez always does this. Its almost a quarterly thing.


He's like a spoiled bratty child. Stop giving him attention and he'll stfu.

Too late, the King of Spain has already told him to stfu.

Too late, the King of Spain has already told him to stfu.

And thats why the King of Spain is my hero

100% legal.
According to Venezuelan law. But if you break an international contract, then it depends on the content of it whether or not there is scope for compensation. I know that at least one international court of arbitration is sitting in London, so it looks like a standard clause was sitting in there referring the case to this court.

In that case it doesn't really matter that Chávez represents a state rather than a company, Venezuela has signed a contract that it must by rights live up to.

And the thing about arbitration is that afterwards you can't just choose to ignore the findings. Once you're committed to the process, you have to stick with its results.

The hilarious thing about all this is that it's got nothing to do with the States. :D

an international contract..say what?

say what?
A contract made between parties from different jurisdictions. You know, like Venezuela and Exxon.

In it both parties have great freedom to decide how disputes would be settled - how, where, by whom, in what language and so on and so forth. Generally they're very simple standard clauses everyone's happy with, on big contracts like this one the provisions were probably more elaborate.

dp

I don't know enough about it to say what he's doing or going to do is good for his country or not. But I will say.. balls to him for telling us to stick it. Hopefully he won't end up like Cuba.. although Cuba is not in the shitter. Americans and others go there for medical treatments. I can't remember where I read it atm, but Cuba was pretty high ranked as far as some surgeries go. So it's not like they will fall cause WE weren't there to 'guide' them. If we throw them to the curb.. someone else will grab em. As far as trade goes.

A contract made between parties from different jurisdictions. You know, like Venezuela and Exxon.The Oilfields in Venezuela are 100% Venezuelan jurisdiction.
Any Infrastructure built in Venezuelan land by Exxon are 100% Venezuelan jurisdiction.

To pretend otherwise is absurd.

To pretend otherwise is ridiculous.
Hit a sensitive spot, have I?

Exxon is not Venezuelan. Venezuela is not from the US. So the two are entities from different jurisdictions.

They came together at some point to negotiate. Exxon wanted to export oil from Venezuela, and Venezuela wanted someone to get it out of the ground and pay taxes.

In the contract there would have been various terms and conditions of use and ownership. One clause in that section would probably have said something along the lines of "any change to this section requires the consultation and agreement of both parties".

Then there was a dispute resolution section which in all likelihood would have said that the first point of call is mediation (that is, friendly talks between the two sides to find a compromise), followed by arbitration in London. Both sides agreed to this.

Later Chávez wanted the terms changed. He went ahead, Exxon didn't like it. There was a dispute, so they tried mediation. It doesn't look like that worked out, by which time we got the news headlines and you guys were being gleeful. Exxon went to the next step, which is the arbitration. They claim they weren't consulted, the terms of the contract were violated and therefore compensation of some sort is in order (apparently to "seize assets worth billions"). Sometimes that compensation is already referred to in the contract, sometimes the arbitrator decides it based on the merits of the case and projected profits and losses of the parties had the contract been fulfilled.

Now it will soon make its findings public, and Chávez starts yelling at Washington again.

Exxon needs to hire the King of Spain to be their representative. Heck even the U.S could use him for their diplomat.

The Oilfields in Venezuela are 100% Venezuelan jurisdiction.
Any Infrastructure built in Venezuelan land by Exxon are 100% Venezuelan jurisdiction.

To pretend otherwise is absurd.

Anything brought by OceanDrive into your house is yours, kids. Including his pants.

The fact the Exxon, as a private entity thinks it has equal rights to a state is disgusting, Chavez should just confiscate all their property by force, 'technical expropriation' can only go so far, eventually the bourgeois will resist and then you must send in the troops.

The fact the Exxon, as a private entity thinks it has equal rights to a state is disgusting, Chavez should just confiscate all their property by force, 'technical expropriation' can only go so far, eventually the bourgeois will resist and then you must send in the troops.



That would be a really intellegent call on Chavez's part:rolleyes:

The fact the Exxon, as a private entity thinks it has equal rights to a state is disgusting, Chavez should just confiscate all their property by force, 'technical expropriation' can only go so far, eventually the bourgeois will resist and then you must send in the troops.

I wonder what the rest of the bourgeois world would do to Chavez and Venezuela after this happens?

I wonder what the rest of the bourgeois world would do to Chavez and Venezuela after this happens?
Not direct intervention if that's what you mean, it's no longer 1918 and you can't get away with that anymore. Either way, so long as Chavez allows the bourgeois to operate in Venezuela, they will undermine all his efforts towards socialism, and will indeed attempt to reverse any social gains.

To build socialism while the bourgeois are left unhindered is ludicrous, and also flies in the face of Marxism. The bourgeois will continue to undermine the Bolivarian Revolution until they are expropriated, they also sprout right-wing propaganda daily on the Venezuelan private channels, and receive funding from the US. They have already attempted a military coup which briefly put into power a business leader as President, before Chavez was returned.

Chavez needs to understand that he must be unflinching in his aggravation of class struggle, and he needs to know that these dramas etc will continue until socialism is consolidated in Venezuela and the bourgeois liquidated.

Chavez must cut off the funds to the media elites from abroad, and seize their property. Chavez has also made some good gains, firstly he has nationalized the banks, that's good because that's one source the bourgeois no longer have, the same for oil revenues, the media and foreign influence is their last bulwark.

Isn't this like trying to hurt the mayor of a town because one of the town's citizens robbed a bank in another town? What the hell? Chavez must have eaten fail for breakfast because he's made of it.

lolz...you are what you eat...:p

like most have said before, Chavez is just being an attention whore

Not direct intervention if that's what you mean, it's no longer 1918 and you can't get away with that anymore.


Really? You think that if Chavez kicked an Oil Company out with military force the US wouldnt storm the country? With Bush in office? You really doubt this?


ps- Its not 1918 in Russia anymore, your right. You can just send in troops to remove the evil corperate and other elite and expect to get away with it.

Anything brought by OceanDrive into your house is yours, kids. any infrastructure I build in the UK is under UK Jurisdiction, any infrastructure I build in the US is under US jurisdiction.

what part dont you understand?

I would like to offer Chavez this:

How about a warm glass of shut the fuck up!
http://content.ytmnd.com/content/2/8/2/282777c3cc3d0d72bf4d9463387efa91.jpg

I would like to offer Chavez this:

How about a warm glass of shut the fuck up!
http://content.ytmnd.com/content/2/8/2/282777c3cc3d0d72bf4d9463387efa91.jpg

http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/protectedimage.php?image=DaveFoster/dodgeball12.jpg

Yisrael, as I can see from your latest picture, I am not sure you can convince Chavez to have a glass of your milkshake :D

If Venezuela cuts of oil shippments then we should cut them off from some of our exports like wheat and metal. A full list of American exports to Venezuela can be seen here (http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/product/enduse/exports/c3070.html).

If Venezuela cuts of oil shippments then we should cut them off from some of our exports like wheat and metal. A full list of American exports to Venezuela can be seen here (http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/product/enduse/exports/c3070.html).Yeah, and you know what about Venezuelan Fries, from now on we should call them Freedom fries :D

any infrastructure I build in the UK is under UK Jurisdiction, any infrastructure I build in the US is under US jurisdiction.

what part dont you understand?

But the contract regarding this infrastructure was contracted in the international arena, and is subject to international arbitration.

Unless Chavez is willing to take his George W. Bush impersonations to the next level, and really start to wave his tiny little penis at the international community, and refuse to abide by the rules that everyone else abides by.

Unless Chavez is willing to take his George W. Bush impersonations to the next level, and really start to wave his tiny little penis at the international community, and refuse to abide by the rules that everyone else abides by.You think Chavez is about to invade another country -preemptive war- leading to the deaths of over 100 thousand people, to help the EXXONs and Halliburtons?

I dont think so. Chavez is not a War criminal.

Why on earth should Chavez conform to international bourgeois standards?

You think Chavez is about to invade another country -preemptive war- leading to the deaths of over 100 thousand people, to help the EXXONs and Halliburtons?

I dont think so.

Mmm...let's see. He's cut off diplomatic relations with the Colombians, he's radically increased the size of the Venezuelan military and improved the quality of their weapons, he's a former military commander who's attempted to overthrow a democratically elected government in the past. I think he sounds like precisely the sort of warmonger to pick that sort of shit up, only he's likely to on the part of PDVSA, not Exxon Mobil.

And no, Chavez is now war criminal, just a criminal.

Oh, and there's more to Bush's foreign policy than a misbegotten war in the Middle East. There's thumbing his nose at the International Criminal Court, the Kyoto Treaty and the United Nations. That's what Chavez is imitating if he ignores the rulings that are handed down against PDVSA, and it's a very bad thing to do.

Mmm...let's see. He's cut off diplomatic relations with the Colombians, he's radically increased the size of the Venezuelan military and improved the quality of their weapons.that does not make him a criminal.. and it that does not make him a -Bush like- War criminal.

that does not make him a criminal.. and it that does not make him a -Bush like- War criminal.

The criminality stems from his coup d'etat in 1992. He was, after all, imprisoned after the attempt.

The first paragraph dealt with the obvious fact that Chavez is a dangerous militarist, who's playing a dangerous game of brinkmanship with his neighbor, Colombia.

Why on earth should Chavez conform to international bourgeois standards?

Because he gets money and goods from the rest of the world, perhaps?

The criminality stems from his coup d'etat in 1992. He was, after all, imprisoned after the attempt.

The first paragraph dealt with the obvious fact that Chavez is a dangerous militarist, who's playing a dangerous game of brinkmanship with his neighbor, Colombia.

Let's not forget that he's shut down newspapers and media outlets that disagree with him, something that only Dictators (and not Bush) do.

Chavez is a Nationalist, and a Socialist. You know what we got the last time those two things were mixed... If you edit out "Americans" from everything Chavez says, and replace it with "Jews," the rhetoric is STARTLINGLY familiar.

How do you say "Mein Kampf" in Spanish?

Oh, and might I ask, what, exactly does the United States have to do with this dispute? Exxon Mobil is not acting on the behalf or as a representative of the United States government, and the ruling that is at hand was handed down by a British court, not an American.





And what kind of nitwit calls another grown man "Mr. Danger"? That wouldn't even pass for playground banter amongst seven year olds where I come from.

Please, don't Godwin this.


Much like the slippery slope argument, it's only invalid when it AIN'T true.

Venezuela's oil exports amount to 15% of America's oil needs, the question I suppose then is could the US or Venezuela replace that if trade was cancelled between them. I suppose Venezuela could just sell it to China, I am sure they'd pay the same and their desperate for it these days. I suppose also the US would have to convince OPEC to increase supply to replace said downfall.

Venezuela stands to lose less than the US here. OPEC has limited capacity to increase output far beyond what they do now. It also depends on refinery output that is the biggest problem. Refineries cannot keep up with the demand they have now. Venezuela is an OPEC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oil-producing_states#South_America) nation as well. As a matter of fact they were part of the original group in 1960.

Let's not forget that he's shut down newspapers and media outlets that disagree with him, something that only Dictators (and not Bush) do.

Chavez is a Nationalist, and a Socialist. You know what we got the last time those two things were mixed... If you edit out "Americans" from everything Chavez says, and replace it with "Jews," the rhetoric is STARTLINGLY familiar.

How do you say "Mein Kampf" in Spanish?

Please, don't Godwin this.

The criminality stems from his coup d'etat in 1992. He was, after all, imprisoned after the attempt.

The first paragraph dealt with the obvious fact that Chavez is a dangerous militarist, who's playing a dangerous game of brinkmanship with his neighbor, Colombia.

You're a joke. Venezuela, in an effect with Cuba, is attempting to start a peaceful integration process for Southern and Central America and the Carribean. Chavez does good deals on oil in social missions across the the continent impoverish by neoliberal imperialism. Cuban doctors, thousands in all, with Venezuelan oil revenues, have built schools, created clinics, educated the poor all around the continent.

And just to confirm to our Godwin friend here, Chavez has only closed one private media channel, one, RCTV, and he closed them down because of their explicit role in the military coup that briefly ousted him, and because they are run by funds from the US (ie treason). All the other nine of however many stations are still operating, Chavez uses a single channel, the public broadcaster, to give speeches on policies, to address his nation as head of state.

Seriously people, take your Faux inspired claptrap elsewhere....

You're a joke. Venezuela, in an effect with Cuba, is attempting to start a peaceful integration process for Southern and Central America and the Carribean. Chavez does good deals on oil in social missions across the the continent impoverish by neoliberal imperialism. Cuban doctors, thousands in all, with Venezuelan oil revenues, have built schools, created clinics, educated the poor all around the continent.

This is a joke right?


And just to confirm to our Godwin friend here, Chavez has only closed one private media channel, one, RCTV


My buddy who lives there says otherwise. According to him, any that arent government run were shut down.

My buddy who lives there says otherwise. According to him, any that arent government run were shut down.

He's lying then, or under a misconception, Venezuela still has tonnes of private channels running, all of them mind you blindly anti-Chavez, so much so (I am told) that they would have Fox blush...

Oil is fungible. Chavez is an ass.

He's lying then, or under a misconception, Venezuela still has tonnes of private channels running, all of them mind you blindly anti-Chavez, so much so (I am told) that they would have Fox blush...


Do you live there? Because if you dont Im inclined to believe him.

In fact, even if you do live there, because of your obvious bias, Im still inclined to believe him.

Last time I checked, Andaras is from Australia.


Then my point is proven.

Do you live there? Because if you dont Im inclined to believe him.

In fact, even if you do live there, because of your obvious bias, Im still inclined to believe him.

Last time I checked, Andaras is from Australia.

The first paragraph dealt with the obvious fact that Chavez is a dangerous militarist, who's playing a dangerous game of brinkmanship with his neighbor, Colombia.your first paragraph does not make him a War Criminal.

The criminality stems from his coup d'etat in 1992. He was, after all, imprisoned after the attempt.if you obtain a pardon from Parliament you are not a Criminal.

When did this pardon occur?I dont have the date.

Why on earth should Chavez conform to international bourgeois standards?

If he wants to play, he should at least make an effort to look like he's playing by the rules.

This is a joke right?

Nope, AP really believes that crap.

If he wants to play, he should at least make an effort to look like he's playing by the rules.the Law says Nationalization is 100% legal.

If EXXON Valdez wants to play in Venezuela they should be prepared to comply with the Law.

if you obtain a pardon from Parliament you are not a Criminal.

When did this pardon occur?

the Law says Nationalization is 100% legal.

If EXXON Valdez wants to play in Venezuela they should be prepared to comply with the Law.



Too bad contracts are legally binding eh?

Chavez just realized he cant break the contract just cause he wants and threw a hissy fit.

Provided that it was done within the confines of ..you are not making any sense.

The Law can allow/define/limit/regulate/nullify any Contract.

A contract canNOT nullify, limit or define the Law.

In that case, I'm not taking the pardon thing seriously.Dont. *shrugs*

the Law says Nationalization is 100% legal.

If EXXON Valdez wants to play in Venezuela they should be prepared to comply with the Law.

Provided that it was done within the confines of Contract. Now we are into Contract Laws.

I dont have the date.

In that case, I'm not taking the pardon thing seriously.

In that case, I'm not taking the pardon thing seriously.

here you go:

After a two-year imprisonment, Chávez was pardoned by President Rafael Caldera in 1994.
also (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3517106.stm)


Neither gives the exact date, but it does confirm OD

Take note how rarely anyone agrees with AP on this forum....For the record. I do agree on multiple issues with AP.

You're a joke. Venezuela, in an effect with Cuba, is attempting to start a peaceful integration process for Southern and Central America and the Carribean. Chavez does good deals on oil in social missions across the the continent impoverish by neoliberal imperialism. Cuban doctors, thousands in all, with Venezuelan oil revenues, have built schools, created clinics, educated the poor all around the continent.

No, you're the joke.

Take note how rarely anyone agrees with you on this forum, your adherence to a ridiculous, inhuman and brutal ideology that was used to justify the murder of millions of people, who were usually chosen at random, because they looked at a Chekist funny, or some Nomenklatura didn't like someones haircut.

the Law says Nationalization is 100% legal.

If EXXON Mobil wants to play in Venezuela they should be prepared to comply with the Law.

It's a damn fucking shame that contracts hold the force of law, eh? Especially when a contract is made with the state.

Blatant, misrepresentative appeals to emotion are lame.

Blatant, misrepresentative appeals to emotion are lame.you have to be in control of you emotions when you are up against me, otherwise you may feel the weather a bit rough. ;)
.
It's a damn fucking shame that contracts hold the force of law, eh? Especially when a contract is made with the state.You have it all backwards, a contract with the state is a big gamble BECAUSE the state always has the most cards of the deck. And in some countries the state has all the cards.

Which explains why no one takes you that seriously.I love it when you say "look at me I (Corny) speak for all of NSG" ;)

For the record. I do agree on multiple issues with AP.

Which explains why no one takes you that seriously.

That does not reflect positively on you, then, does it?I am not on a popularity contest.

If I think he is right, I will give him my -nod- even if that makes me unpopular, its a matter of principle.

and if I think he is on the wrong, I wont get on his case, because there is already 50 people kicking him on the floor :D

(I am not a fan of kicking someone when he is down)

For the record. I do agree on multiple issues with AP.

That does not reflect positively on you, then, does it?

I am not on a popularity contest.

If I think he is right, I will give him my -nod- even if that makes me unpopular, its a matter of principle.

It isn't about popularity, it's about his demonstrated poor judgment in choice of beliefs, against which I have already laid out quite a clear condemnation. If his general choice of ideology is a reflection on the rest of his beliefs, it's pretty clear that he's in bad shape, as are those who agree with him on most anything.

..choice of beliefs, against which I have already laid out quite a clear condemnation. If his general choice of ideology...I dont support all his beliefs, but i dont condemn him either.

and its not like if I am going to expend most of my internet time defending him from the Dogs of War..

He has to defend himself..

But dont trow -at him- things like "everyone hates you and/or everyone hates you Ideas".. because that kind of statement is -for sure- going to get my attention.

kapicchi?

Wow, Andaluciae, way to go off and flame me because you can't answer my statements.

Also, just to confirm, I don't follow any 'ideology', in fact I am specifically anti-idealistic, I consider Marxism to be an objective science and not an ideology.

Man? More like overgrown little boy.

Seriously, what else can you call a person with etiquette and conduct befitting a five-year-old?

A hero, entertaining us all.

you have to be in control of you emotions when you are up against me, otherwise you may feel the weather a bit rough. ;)

No, you really don't, because most of your arguments are constructed primarily of substantially less-than-clever puns and word plays, awful English, a near-total lack of capitalization and bizarrely placed periods.

Sometimes you'll drag in irrelevancies and events that happened well before I was born, too.

You have it all backwards, a contract with the state is a big gamble BECAUSE the state always has the most cards of the deck. And in some countries the state has all the cards.

Unless it's an international contract, disputes about which can be adjudicated in international courts, and assets frozen abroad.

More than that, states need to maintain credibility, especially with investors abroad, who learn about the dangers of investing in a nationalizer quite quickly. "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice..." after all.

states need to maintain credibility, especially with investors abroad, who learn about the dangers of investing in a nationalizer quite quickly. "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice..." after all.this is the first time -today- you are making sense.

Now you are talking.

No, you're the joke.

Take note how rarely anyone agrees with you on this forum, your adherence to a ridiculous, inhuman and brutal ideology that was used to justify the murder of millions of people, who were usually chosen at random, because they looked at a Chekist funny, or some Nomenklatura didn't like someones haircut.
So, let me get this straight, I am wrong because the majority of NSGer's do not agree with me? Wow, that strikes me as glorifying ignorance, as if cultural misconceptions and lies are somehow higher than the truth.

And, anyways, OD, look at which party is making the threats in this case: It's quite clearly Chavez who is threatening the national well-being of the United States, over something that United States government, especially the Presidency and Congress, has no control. Bush can't stop Exxon Mobil from suing, and can't stop the courts from deciding in Exxon Mobil's favor. In fact, it almost seems like Chavez is trying to subvert the independent judiciary in the United States.the US Judiciary should not have any Jurisdiction over Infrastructures built in Venezuela.

the US Judiciary should not have any Jurisdiction over oil fields in Venezuela.

Venezuela is a sovereign Country.

And, anyways, OD, look at which party is making the threats in this case: It's quite clearly Chavez who is threatening the national well-being of the United States, over something that United States government, especially the Presidency and Congress, has no control. Bush can't stop Exxon Mobil from suing, and can't stop the courts from deciding in Exxon Mobil's favor. In fact, it almost seems like Chavez is trying to subvert the independent judiciary in the United States, for the selfish interests of his own private oil company, PDVSA.

If the leftist enviromentalists just allowed us to drill for oil in the U.S this would not be an issue. Canadians and other leftist countries drill, so I guess the reason OUR leftists don't want us to is to weaken the U.S.

And, anyways, OD, look at which party is making the threats in this case: It's quite clearly Chavez who is threatening the national well-being of the United States,
Incorrect, he's threatening the cashed-up salaries of the Exxon board and affiliates, and he's challenging their previous unchecked ability to rape and pillage resources in Southern and Central America. If anything this could make the American people turn to renewable sources of energy, rather than apathetically selling out their energy dependence to greedy private firms.

over something that United States government, especially the Presidency and Congress, has no control. Bush can't stop Exxon Mobil from suing, and can't stop the courts from deciding in Exxon Mobil's favor.
Did you chuckle when you wrote this? Honestly I don't see how you could have kept a straight face, even a cursory analysis shows the close fascist-like relationship in the US between the state and the corporation, if you think private industry (specifically the commanding heights) are independent of the US state, you're deluded.


In fact, it almost seems like Chavez is trying to subvert the independent judiciary in the United States,
I admit it, I lol'd.

for the selfish interests of his own private oil company, PDVSA.
No, it's not a private company, it's a public company, meaning it's owned by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and by extension it's people as a whole. Fail.

Wow, Andaluciae, way to go off and flame me because you can't answer my statements.

You called me a joke, I merely responded in turn, and my response was not flaming. It is a legitimate criticism of your ideology.

But, beyond that, I already laid out a case as to why Chavez was militaristic and aggressive, and it is a sufficient case.

Also, just to confirm, I don't follow any 'ideology', in fact I am specifically anti-idealistic, I consider Marxism to be an objective science and not an ideology.

Waiter, check please. I'm laughing too hard to finish my meal.

Wow, Andaluciae, way to go off and flame me..to be honest I have not seen any (poster-to-poster) flames today.

Yes, in other threads, in the past, you have been flamed and barbecued like a Blackwater Contractor in Falluha.. but not today, as far as I can see.

So, let me get this straight, I am wrong because the majority of NSGer's do not agree with me? Wow, that strikes me as glorifying ignorance, as if cultural misconceptions and lies are somehow higher than the truth.

No, you're a joke because you can't take a cue from anyone else. Your beliefs are ridiculous, for a whole host of other reasons I have already provided in this, and other threads.

To quote myself...


...your adherence to a ridiculous, inhuman and brutal ideology that was used to justify the murder of millions of people, who were usually chosen at random, because they looked at a Chekist funny, or some Nomenklatura didn't like someones haircut.

The amount of evidence that exists against your so-called "science" is immense, to be found in history, sociology, psychology, economics and political science.

the US Judiciary should not have any Jurisdiction over Infrastructures built in Venezuela.

It has jurisdiction on all American Owned companies including those with assets overseas.

the US Judiciary should not have any Jurisdiction over oil fields in Venezuela.

Well...those oil fields are owned by an American Company.

Venezuela is a sovereign Country.

For once, you are right. So is the United States.

It has jurisdiction on all American Owned companies including those with assets overseas.



Well...those oil fields are owned by an American Company.



For once, you are right. So is the United States.#1 wrong.

#2 wrong.

3# ...
???

and -amazingly- even when you are saying "yes OD, you are right" you somehow managed to be wrong again. :D

the US Judiciary should not have any Jurisdiction over Infrastructures built in Venezuela.

the US Judiciary should not have any Jurisdiction over oil fields in Venezuela.

The US judiciary, however, does have jurisdiction over international contracts that were contracted between American citizens and corporations, and foreign governments, and that is quite clear.

Venezuela is a sovereign Country.

So what? Sovereignty is not what it used to be, and that is quite clear throughout the field. Borders are softening, and the justifications for exclusivity of governance are weakening. When you start dealing with the citizens of another country, or of multiple other countries, you've already begun to compromise your country's sovereignty.

No, you're a joke because you can't take a cue from anyone else. Your beliefs are ridiculous, for a whole host of other reasons I have already provided in this, and other threads.
'Take a cue from anyone else...' My goodness that sounds like more of the same cultural ignorance again, as if the vast majority of ignorant people are somehow correct by virtue of number, this flies in the face of reality and the reality of knowledge.

The amount of evidence that exists against your so-called "science" is immense, to be found in history, sociology, psychology, economics and political science.
Which explains why you merely mentioned it briefly and said nothing else....

Please, enough of the drive-byes...

So what? Sovereignty is not what it used to be, and that is quite clear throughout the field. you have already tried that rhetoric against me before, in 2007, 2006, etc,... and it did not work.

What makes you think its going to work today?

The US judiciary, however, does have jurisdiction over international contracts that were contracted between American citizens and corporations, and foreign governments, and that is quite clear.



So what? Sovereignty is not what it used to be, and that is quite clear throughout the field. Borders are softening, and the justifications for exclusivity of governance are weakening. When you start dealing with the citizens of another country, or of multiple other countries, you've already begun to compromise your country's sovereignty.
But that decision to associate beyond a countries borders is not done out of a deliberate attempt to break down national borders, but out of practical considerations in resources etc. I agree to a large extent that humankind is interdependent, but you're concept of such seems to me to be nothing but a justification for the national 'master-servant' relationship embodied in neoliberal imperialism worldwide.

The 'Washington Consensus' is nothing but a concerted attempt to build a internationalized bourgeois class, who have no borders and thus no 'common' loyalty to any nation or people, they have shares, interests etc all over the region or the world, and their own 'interest' is only in callous, calculating profit motive. Exxon and such firms are merely the vanguard for said process, not to empower the common people but to create a global upper class, and more importantly a global serf class. Peasants run off their land, poor people in rural conditions, all of his is made possible by corrupt elites in power in those countries, whose governmental power is only made possible by foreign investment revenue, and surplus extracted by exploited workers.

It seems in the modern world, any corrupt elitist tinpot capitalist dictatorship (in the Third World) automatically becomes a 'democracy' the second it allows foreign investment. Little Wonder....

Incorrect, he's threatening the cashed-up salaries of the Exxon board and affiliates, and he's challenging their previous unchecked ability to rape and pillage resources in Southern and Central America. If anything this could make the American people turn to renewable sources of energy, rather than apathetically selling out their energy dependence to greedy private firms.

Except he's threatening this in the dead of winter, when millions of Americans are already facing increased heating costs for both heating oil and natural gas.


Did you chuckle when you wrote this? Honestly I don't see how you could have kept a straight face, even a cursory analysis shows the close fascist-like relationship in the US between the state and the corporation, if you think private industry (specifically the commanding heights) are independent of the US state, you're deluded.

Exxon Mobil is beyond the control of the United States government in many ways,



I admit it, I lol'd.

You wouldn't know the first thing about an independent judiciary, given that your model state utilized drumhead courts, show trials, honor trials, or just plan abduction and disappearance on a minutely basis.


No, it's not a private company, it's a public company, meaning it's owned by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and by extension it's people as a whole. Fail.

He treats it like it's his own private reserve, appointing only his cronies to positions of importance and influence, directly controlling PDVSA policy, regardless of reality and a whole mess of other things. His control over PDVSA is darn near absolute.

#1 wrong.

Prove it.

#2 wrong.

Prove it.

3# ...
???

What? Venezuela is indeed a soveriegn country. Is that hard to comprehend?

and -amazingly- even when you are saying "yes OD, you are right" you somehow managed to be wrong again. :D

What? Venezuela is not a soveriegn country?

Prove it.
Prove it.no X 2
.
What? Venezuela is indeed a soveriegn country. Is that hard to comprehend?

What? Venezuela is not a soveriegn country?
Yes Venezuela is a sovereign country.
Yes the US is a sovereign country.

#1+#2 do not help you make your point. They make my point

My point is Venezuelan Law applies in Venezuela.

'Take a cue from anyone else...' My goodness that sounds like more of the same cultural ignorance again, as if the vast majority of ignorant people are somehow correct by virtue of number, this flies in the face of reality and the reality of knowledge.

Except, in the case of Nation States General we aren't talking about a vast, uneducated bulk. We're talking about a community of sophisticated and intelligent people, intimately acquainted with a broad base of knowledge, provided from differing perspectives.

Furthermore, my training has led me to be incredibly skeptical of anyone claiming to hold access to the absolute, scientific truth, in the social sciences, simply because it is not possible for there to be an absolute, scientific truth in this field.

This isn't cultural ignorance, this is your willful blindness of the truth of the matter.

Which explains why you merely mentioned it briefly and said nothing else....

Please, enough of the drive-byes...

Fine, you want a damning bit on Soviet industrial, technical and social policy? Read the book "The Ghost of the Executed Engineer" about Peter Palchinsky, by Loren Graham, or perhaps Graham's "Moscow Stories", his recounting of his firsthand experiences as an exchange student in the USSR in the early sixties, and the development of his professional and academic career in relation to that state since then.

How about a condemnation of the Gulag system? Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's works fit quite well.

The Stalinist penchant for altering history to suit it's own needs, regardless of how history actually happened? Try "The Commissar Vanishes" by David King. It'll show you a delightful series of edited and cropped photos and paintings that were prepared for the benefit of the Communist Party in the USSR.

Or maybe, straight from the Horse's mouth! Khrushchev's secret speech condemning the actions of Stalin, the unbelievable excesses of the regime. http://www.uwm.edu/Course/448-343/index12.html

The list is endless, the condemnation insurmountable. Marxism-Leninism is dead, and the goal of ordering a "scientific society" with it.

Except he's threatening this in the dead of winter, when millions of Americans are already facing increased heating costs for both heating oil and natural gas. just write EXXON a letter:

http://www.exxonmobil.com/imports/contactus/contactus_contact.aspx


Mr Chairman
1 mansion hill,
Ocean Drive California 78945

Dear Mr Multi-millionaire,
next time you want to raise a little hell with el senor presidente Chavez, would you please do it in summer, thank you.

truly yours,

Joe Average.
2345 Main Street apt#405
Pittsburg PA 45632

you have already tried that rhetoric against me before, in 2007, 2006, etc,... and it did not work.

What makes you think its going to work today?

It's a simple fact that the sovereignty is no longer absolute. States around the world are bound together, economically, politically and militarily, and that when they do this, they cede a degree of their own sovereignty to other states and actors. In this case, it is the fact that the Venezuelan state can be sued abroad, for it's transgressions against citizens of other states at home.

You can ignore that all you want and babble on about "sovereignty" until they cancel class at OSU because of snow, but that doesn't change the fact that because of how contract law is treated internationally, the sovereignty of states is not inviolate.

no X 2

Then you really do not have a leg to stand on. I will let you in on a little secret. When it comes to International Contract Law, the US Courts do indeed have jurisdiction in the matter as it involves an American Private Business.

Yes Venezuela is a sovereign country.
Yes the US is a sovereign country.

So why did you tell me I was wrong? Oh wait...

#1+#2 do not help you make your point. They make my point

That made me laugh

My point is Venezuelan Law applies in Venezuela.

And contracts apply to all people, including soveriegn governments. Guess what? The American Courts can take this up and rule on such matters because it deals with an American Private Business. This is not hard to understand OD. But then...it must to you because you sure as hell have yet to prove the assertion that an American Business with contracts overseas can sue said person they have a contract with for breach of contract.

Wait a second, you didn't just recommend Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn did you, now that is uber lulz, that guy is probably the biggest mouthpiece of imperialism ever!

Also Khrushchev! the very man you restored capitalism to the USSR, wow your sources are the height of unbiased fact...:rolleyes:

That's the problem with the Anti-Stalin camp, you blindly make emotional appeals to cultural ignorance, 'Stalin was bad' yada yada... Ignoring the fact that when Yelstin released Soviet prisoner records they were far less than in the US. In actual fact the Soviet system of the party and worker councils allowed far less power to any individual than the US constitution does to the President. For this I suggest the British Fabian economists Sidney and Beatrice Webb, in their comprehensive book ‘Soviet Communism: A New Civilisation’.

As for the economy, under Stalin worker control exploded industrial output and productivity, in 1913 industrial development in the USSR was +291.9%, as opposed to —24.6% in Germany, —14.8% in Britain and +10.2% in the USA.

The strongly anti-Soviet American writer Eugene Lyons once asked Stalin directly: ‘Are you a dictator?’ Lyons goes on (and I quote:)

"Stalin smiled, implying that the question was on the preposterous side.

‘No’, he said slowly, ‘I am no dictator. Those who use the word do not understand the Soviet system of government and the methods of the Communist Party. No one man or group of men can dictate. Decisions are made by the Party".

As for the cult of personality, Stalin (as did Lenin) spoke out against it, indeed Stalin recognized it as a concerted attack to try and paint him as a fascist dictator and oust him.

There was indeed a ‘cult of personality’ around Stalin. A leading communist cried at the 18th Congress of the Party in March 1939:

"The Ukrainian people proclaim with all their heart and soul . ‘Long live our beloved Stalin!’ .

Long live the towering genius of all humanity, . . . our beloved Comrade Stalin!"

The speaker was Nikita Khrushchev!

Also Khrushchev! the very man you restored capitalism to the USSR, wow your sources are the height of unbiased fact...

You mean saved the USSR from economic collapse and opened it to the world, creating a true superpower in the process?

As for the economy, under Stalin worker control exploded industrial output and productivity, in 1913 industrial development in the USSR was +291.9%, as opposed to —24.6% in Germany, —14.8% in Britain and +10.2% in the USA.

Starting from a low base, however. Also, you neglect to mention it came at a huge environmental cost as well as at the cost of providing good housing, food and consumer goods/services. If you control for other factors besides raw production of industrial goods, Stalin's USSR was far less impressive.

Not surprisingly, living standards were the very things Khrushchev focused on, producing the far superior prosperity of his period.

As for the cult of personality, Stalin (as did Lenin) spoke out against it, indeed Stalin recognized it as a concerted attack to try and paint him as a fascist dictator and oust him.

He certainly made no effort to stop it. Unlike, again, Khrushchev, who basically dismantled the cult of personality.

The speaker was Nikita Khrushchev!

I don't think you know much about Khrushchev. He was a wily, politically astute man who was more than willing to tow the party line as a way of gaining more power. If he didn't praise Stalin, he would've been shot and buried in some mass grave.

Why don't we (the USA) just invade Venezuela and take their oil?

That'd keep prices down. We could just make up a cover story about them being involved in 9/11 and having WMD's, and it just may work.

Hey, Andaras!

Better dead than red!

Why don't we (the USA) just invade Venezuela and take their oil?

That'd keep prices down. We could just make up a cover story about them being involved in 9/11 and having WMD's, and it just may work.

Nice comedy!

Why don't we (the USA) just invade Venezuela and take their oil?

That'd keep prices down. We could just make up a cover story about them being involved in 9/11 and having WMD's, and it just may work.

Hey hey now, don't give anyone ideas like that now...

Vetalia, what 'economic collapse', the Soviet economy in industrial output was exploding in Stalin's time, and he managed to completely rebuild the USSR from WWII in a single 5-year plan, I have more statistics if you which clearly prove the superiority of the planned worker economy, or as Marx put it the 'predetermined outcome' economy.

You continue to to sprout the ignorance misconceptions of 'terror' and 'mass graves', indeed when an American journalist visited a labor camp he noted that he didn't realize it was a prison, and simply had people working etc in good conditions in comradely. The only 'mass deaths' were those caused by the whiteguards slaughtering cattle and burning fields, causing famine, as well as the kulaks in Stalin's time who horded and sold approximately 40,000,000+ poods of grain by speculating on higher prices in foreign capitalist markets, causing famine in the Ukraine.

Stalin fought fervently against the cult of personality fervently, for example, when in February 1938 someone wanted to publish entitled ‘Stories of the Childhood of Stalin’, Stalin wrote typically:

"I am absolutely against the publication of ‘Stories of the Childhood of Stalin’.

The book abounds with a mass of inexactitudes of fact, . . . of exaggerations and of unmerited praise. .

But… the important thing resides tendency to engrave on the minds of Soviet children (and people in general) the personality cult of leaders, of infallible heroes. This is dangerous and detrimental…I suggest we burn this book".

Stalin in fact was a scientific man, who kept figures of gold and ore output in his pocket, and far from perpetuating the mythical 'cult of personality' the education system in his time didn't mention anything of him, only in a historical context of the revolution etc, the rest was objective Marxism-Leninism.


One of the charges often leveled against Stalin is that while he was General Secretary of the Party many innocent people were falsely imprisoned for counter-revolutionary criminal of fences. This allegation, unlike most of the others, is true. Between 1934 and 1938 the post of People’s Commissar for Internal Affairs - in charge of the security police - was held successively by Genrikh Yagoda and Nikolai Yezhov. At Yagoda’s public trial in 1938, he described to the court how he had used his authority to serve the conspiracy by protecting his fellow—conspirators from arrest, but arresting loyal communists on false charges.

It was Stalin who, suspecting something was terribly wrong, got his personal secretariat under Aleksandr Poskrebyshev to investigate what was going on in the security police.

It was as a result of these investigations that Yagoda and Yezhov were dismissed and arrested, that all cases of alleged political crimes were reinvestigated and thousands miscarriages of justice were corrected.

It was more than anything this situation which led to the production of whole libraries of books accusing Stalin of responsibility for mass murder.

With every edition of such books as Robert Conquest’s ‘The Great Terror’, his estimate of Stalin’s ‘victims ‘ went up by several million to become farcical. When, after the counter—revolution had been completed, Boris Yeltsin published official figures of Soviet prisoners, they turned out to be less than in the United States, and the world press was strangely silent.

... Ignoring the fact that when Yelstin released Soviet prisoner records they were far less than in the US. In actual fact the Soviet system of the party and worker councils allowed far less power to any individual than the US constitution does to the President...

You got that much right. Also far less power to any individual than the average American supermarket clerk.

"Chavez threatens to halt oil sales to US"

well he certainly has every morally legitimate reason to.

until u.s. and other international oil juggernauts stop trying to dictate, which is essentially to say sabotage and prevent, 'third world' environmental policy!

and the u.s. military (AND state department) stops being used back up and bully into submission anyone who refuses to.

=^^=
.../\...

Gah, what an exasperating man...

http://www.yahoo.com/s/805364

Well there goes my 2.93 gas prices :(



The problem though is that the case is in three courts in three different nations and it was not even the US that froze the assets. It was a British Court that did that.
Maybe you should drive less and take public transit more.

Wait a second, you didn't just recommend Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn did you, now that is uber lulz, that guy is probably the biggest mouthpiece of imperialism ever!

Never mind that he aggressively criticized the West and NATO throughout his career, just that he criticized the Stalinist system of imprisonment is enough, in your mind, to label him the "biggest mouthpiece of imperialism ever!"

Also Khrushchev! the very man you restored capitalism to the USSR, wow your sources are the height of unbiased fact...:rolleyes:

Regardless of the fact that Tsarist Russia was never a capitalist state to begin with, that would make it hard to restore capitalism in Russia.

That's the problem with the Anti-Stalin camp, you blindly make emotional appeals to cultural ignorance, 'Stalin was bad' yada yada... Ignoring the fact that when Yelstin released Soviet prisoner records they were far less than in the US. In actual fact the Soviet system of the party and worker councils allowed far less power to any individual than the US constitution does to the President. For this I suggest the British Fabian economists Sidney and Beatrice Webb, in their comprehensive book ?Soviet Communism: A New Civilisation?.

And to blast anything ever claimed by a Fabian, read H.G. Wells' criticism of the group, in which the Webb's receive a special brand of condemnation. Further, given that over half of the people sent to the Gulag were sent there without even the most pathetic semblance of a trial, I wouldn't expect the records that were kept to be particularly good.

But, beyond that, prisons and executions were not the only weapon that Stalin had in his arsenal, he successfully used famine to starve millions to death and subdue entire peoples in incidents such as the Holodomor. As any anthropologist will tell you, famine is an artificial construction, and the famines that faced the USSR were usually quite intentionally constructed, and when not intentional, the burden of famine was shifted towards groups Stalin didn't particularly like.

Further, just to indicate how broadly the Gulag system was used, we can see that the father of the Soviet rocket program, Sergei Korolyov, spent several months in a Gulag, after a mere five minute trial. Do you know what the charges against him were?

He was charged with subversion because of his desire to work on liquid fueled aircraft, rather than solid fuel rockets. This is the man responsible for later lofting Sputnik and Gagarin!

As it became apparent to the Soviet leadership that rocketry was going to be important, they "reviewed" his case, barely in time to save him from dying of scurvy (he nearly died on the train trip back). Kolyma, the camp he was in, had, after all, a 30% mortality rate.

As for the economy, under Stalin worker control exploded industrial output and productivity, in 1913 industrial development in the USSR was +291.9%, as opposed to ?24.6% in Germany, ?14.8% in Britain and +10.2% in the USA.

An economy that benefited from two unique factors, first, that Russia was entirely unindustrialized prior to the thirties (I assume that's what you mean, and not 1913) numbers on economic output were regularly falsified even on the lowest levels. Low-level managers falsified records to show that they had not only met, but exceeded (radically), the goals of the Five Year Plans, but that they also had done it in an extremely short time. Why was this done? Because a manager who couldn't meet up to the level demanded by Stalin was likely to find himself dead. As is readily displayed by the Graham book, "Ghost of the Executed Engineer."

Further, there were several major "prestige" projects, like the Dnieper Dam, Magnitogorsk and the White Sea Canal, which all proved disastrous, to varying degrees later in history, that accounted for a massive portion of Soviet growth. The costs of these projects, both human and financial, though, are immense.

The strongly anti-Soviet American writer Eugene Lyons once asked Stalin directly: ?Are you a dictator?? Lyons goes on (and I quote:)

"Stalin smiled, implying that the question was on the preposterous side.

?No?, he said slowly, ?I am no dictator. Those who use the word do not understand the Soviet system of government and the methods of the Communist Party. No one man or group of men can dictate. Decisions are made by the Party".

And the party was entirely controlled by Stalin, through people like Laverntiy Beria, his blubbery little henchman. As can be seen, he purged every challenger from the party, leaving behind only terrified sycophants. In case you'd like a little bit of further reading, the Great Purge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge) was nothing more than a bid for the consolidation of control.

Further, we can see the value of the rule of the party and elections in Graham's "Moscow Stories", where he simply recounts the story of an "election" he witnessed as a graduate student.

As for the cult of personality, Stalin (as did Lenin) spoke out against it, indeed Stalin recognized it as a concerted attack to try and paint him as a fascist dictator and oust him.

There was indeed a ?cult of personality? around Stalin. A leading communist cried at the 18th Congress of the Party in March 1939:

"The Ukrainian people proclaim with all their heart and soul . ?Long live our beloved Stalin!? .

Long live the towering genius of all humanity, . . . our beloved Comrade Stalin!"

The speaker was Nikita Khrushchev!

Which is part of the reason why he made the secret speech in the first place, he knew that his ass would be history's hotplate for Stalin's crimes, and like the Nazis at Nuremberg, he tried to shuffle the blame off of himself and his fellow central committee members, and onto Stalin. A fact that makes this speech all the more damning.

And yes, the Russian people loved Stalin so much, that the Soviet Academy of Sciences admitted him as a member, never mind that he'd never had any experience or training in any scientific field.

Maybe you should drive less and take public transit more.

Kinda hard to do that when my job requires me to travel all throughout this damn county.

If Venezuela cuts of oil shippments then we should cut them off from some of our exports like wheat and metal. A full list of American exports to Venezuela can be seen here (http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/product/enduse/exports/c3070.html).

Quite interesting. Thank you for the link. It will prove a lot useful for my job.

Mmm...let's see. He's cut off diplomatic relations with the Colombians

Mmmmm....No

he's radically increased the size of the Venezuelan military and improved the quality of their weapons,

Yes, yes.

he's a former military commander who's attempted to overthrow a democratically elected government in the past.

Yes, take that into account when he talks about coups. He seems to think that those who participate or organize coups are the scum of the earth. My logical conclusion is that he labels himself as the scum of the earth, then.

And no, Chavez is now war criminal, just a criminal.

Not yet, until a court decides otherwise.

Let's not forget that he's shut down newspapers and media outlets that disagree with him, something that only Dictators (and not Bush) do.

He did shut down one private television channel.

Chavez is a Nationalist, and a Socialist. You know what we got the last time those two things were mixed... If you edit out "Americans" from everything Chavez says, and replace it with "Jews," the rhetoric is STARTLINGLY familiar.

Not quite, not yet. There are a vague similarity, very very very vague. Chávez has refrained of talking against americans as a people, he talks only against their goverment.

How do you say "Mein Kampf" in Spanish?

Mi Lucha.

Oh, and might I ask, what, exactly does the United States have to do with this dispute? Exxon Mobil is not acting on the behalf or as a representative of the United States government, and the ruling that is at hand was handed down by a British court, not an American.

Nothing really, it is just that the Exxon is an american-based corporation, that's it. It is called "political dodge". Just blame the usual suspect.

And what kind of nitwit calls another grown man "Mr. Danger"? That wouldn't even pass for playground banter amongst seven year olds where I come from.

Sorry, that's the point, "where you come from", that means nothing. However, Chávez is a venezuelan and he made a speech directed at the venezuelan audience. I advise you to make deeper investigations about the specific background of the statement before making assumptions based on your own ignorance. It may be obscure to you, but Mister Danger is a character in the most famous venezuelan novel, called "Doña Bárbara", by Rómulo Gallegos. Míster Danger is an american who calls himself that way, who abuses of the local populace and scams them. He is the archetypical abusing foreigner for us. He just compares Bush to that stereotypical character, it could make no sense to you, but to every venezuelan is a clear reference, as you are forced to read at least two times "Doña Bárbara" in High School.

Not many venezuelans know Shylock, for instance, so calling Ehud Olmert "Shylock", for instance, would be moot to venezuelan ears, and would sound silly. Did I make my point clear?

I hope that sheds some light about the venezuelan culture, who may be unknown to you.

Venezuela stands to lose less than the US here. OPEC has limited capacity to increase output far beyond what they do now. It also depends on refinery output that is the biggest problem. Refineries cannot keep up with the demand they have now. Venezuela is an OPEC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oil-producing_states#South_America) nation as well. As a matter of fact they were part of the original group in 1960.

Both countries lose a lot if the oil supply is cut. But yes, the US loses more.

Regarding Venezuela and the OPEC (OPEP), Venezuela is not just a founding country. The main idea of founding the OPEC came from a venezuelan Minister of Energy and Mining, Juan Pablo Pérez Alfonso, in 1949. Actually, the OPEC as a whole was a venezuelan initiative. Check the OPEC's history please.

You're a joke. Venezuela, in an effect with Cuba, is attempting to start a peaceful integration process for Southern and Central America and the Carribean.

Peaceful as long the other countries agree, if they do not, they are enemies. I think it is a really agressive policy, that one. "Join us or fight us", more rather.

Chavez has only closed one private media channel, one, RCTV, and he closed them down because of their explicit role in the military coup that briefly ousted him, and because they are run by funds from the US (ie treason). All the other nine of however many stations are still operating, Chavez uses a single channel, the public broadcaster, to give speeches on policies, to address his nation as head of state.

He suspended their concession. He didn't close it down. That was your argument back then. Now he did close it? I take for granted that your accepted my argument then. And he closed it because he decided it, just that. They weren't run by US funds, but they indeed joined the attempt of a coup. There are not other nine private TV channels, not with nation wide broadcasting. Your numbers are wrong.

Chávez has several channels. As far as I know, Telesur, VTV the national one, the ANTV and the Vive TV channels.

Seriously people, take your Faux inspired claptrap elsewhere....

Seriously Andaras, take your Faux inspired claptrap elsewhere...You have never been here nor you have direct information.

My buddy who lives there says otherwise. According to him, any that arent government run were shut down.

There are private channels still operating. Your buddy is wrong.

He's lying then, or under a misconception, Venezuela still has tonnes of private channels running, all of them mind you blindly anti-Chavez, so much so (I am told) that they would have Fox blush...

He is indeed. Yet you are lying too, or under a misconception. There aren't tonnes, and only one of them, Globovisión, is blindly anti-Chávez, and it doesn't broadcast nationwide. And no, Globovisión has CNN, not Fox News. No TV channel here is allied with Fox News, or brooadcast its reports.

the Law says Nationalization is 100% legal.

If EXXON Valdez wants to play in Venezuela they should be prepared to comply with the Law.

That is true. Certain clauses were violated, although. Exxon Mobil cannot object the nationalization, but they can ask for an indemnization. That appears in both the law and the contract.

the US Judiciary should not have any Jurisdiction over Infrastructures built in Venezuela.

the US Judiciary should not have any Jurisdiction over oil fields in Venezuela.

Venezuela is a sovereign Country.

This is true too. Please take the last line specially into account mmmkay?

No, it's not a private company, it's a public company, meaning it's owned by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and by extension it's people as a whole. Fail.

PDVSA is a state company under the control of the goverment, at least on paper. So, this is also true.

He treats it like it's his own private reserve, appointing only his cronies to positions of importance and influence, directly controlling PDVSA policy, regardless of reality and a whole mess of other things. His control over PDVSA is darn near absolute.

I agree with this statement, although. Even then, PDVSA is still a state corporation, even if certain people in the goverment manage it as if it belonged to them.

Except, in the case of Nation States General we aren't talking about a vast, uneducated bulk. We're talking about a community of sophisticated and intelligent people, intimately acquainted with a broad base of knowledge, provided from differing perspectives.

Furthermore, my training has led me to be incredibly skeptical of anyone claiming to hold access to the absolute, scientific truth, in the social sciences, simply because it is not possible for there to be an absolute, scientific truth in this field.

This isn't cultural ignorance, this is your willful blindness of the truth

Sorry, but in the specific case of Venezuela, I have to disagree with your statement. Regarding Venezuela, and as I have specified in this post, the "community of sophisticated and intelligent people, intimately acquainted with a broad base of knowledge, provided from differing perspectives", behaves like a "vast, uneducated bulk".

It is cultural ignorance. The OPEC statement, the Mr. Danger statement, the media statement. Those just proves that the majority of NSG is ignorant about the situation in Venezuela and of the culture of that specific country. Not meant to offend, just to highlight facts.

Why don't we (the USA) just invade Venezuela and take their oil?

Oh thank you. I hope you won't complain in the future when we keep calling you unintelligent brutes, and elect leaders that speak against your goverment, and call your presidents Mister Danger. Thanks for the help, with that attitude, you are really convoncing me that the United States is an advanced country that believes in democracy. You look better with your mouth shut and your fingers quiet, this coming from a venezuelan.

Why do you bother Andaluciae? You know all AP, AKA Andaras will do is claim that any conflicting evidence with his imagination is false and a construct of the so called bourgeois and are traitors to the 'glorious revolution'.

And satisfied that he's peddled more lies and propaganda, he'll go back and play his 'bourgeois' Xbox-360. And when you've posted a reply, he'll come back on his 'bourgeois' computer, use the 'bourgeois' internet, and peddle more lies.

You know he's a hypocrite. Arguing with him is like fuel to his ego. If anything, putting him and all his incarnations on the ignore list and consigning him to the trash heap of troll history will do us all a favor.

Why do you bother Andaluciae? You know all AP, AKA Andaras will do is claim that any conflicting evidence with his imagination is false and a construct of the so called bourgeois and are traitors to the 'glorious revolution'.Not always. He flat out ignored it when I pointed out that he supports the bourgeoisie in their suppression of the worker class in that one Chinese town he was praising.

Mmmmm....No

I recalled this article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7115734.stm) incorrectly, sorry about that.

Yes, take that into account when he talks about coups. He seems to think that those who participate or organize coups are the scum of the earth. My logical conclusion is that he labels himself as the scum of the earth, then.

Quite an interesting contrast, if I do say so myself.



Not yet, until a court decides otherwise.

I see I made a bit of a typo, the word "now" should have been "not". I can't believe I missed it this long.




Not quite, not yet. There are a vague similarity, very very very vague. Chávez has refrained of talking against americans as a people, he talks only against their goverment.

Only in the most vague fashion, I would certainly agree. More than that, Chavez has, at least, attempted to show some degree of solidarity with the American people, never mind that this was done solely for the purpose of creating a sense of pressure on the US government to let up on him a bit.




Nothing really, it is just that the Exxon is an american-based corporation, that's it. It is called "political dodge". Just blame the usual suspect.

My point exactly, I was challenging OD's unquestioning loyalty to the wisdom of Chavez with that.



Sorry, that's the point, "where you come from", that means nothing. However, Chávez is a venezuelan and he made a speech directed at the venezuelan audience. I advise you to make deeper investigations about the specific background of the statement before making assumptions based on your own ignorance. It may be obscure to you, but Mister Danger is a character in the most famous venezuelan novel, called "Doña Bárbara", by Rómulo Gallegos. Míster Danger is an american who calls himself that way, who abuses of the local populace and scams them. He is the archetypical abusing foreigner for us. He just compares Bush to that stereotypical character, it could make no sense to you, but to every venezuelan is a clear reference, as you are forced to read at least two times "Doña Bárbara" in High School.

Not many venezuelans know Shylock, for instance, so calling Ehud Olmert "Shylock", for instance, would be moot to venezuelan ears, and would sound silly. Did I make my point clear?

I hope that sheds some light about the venezuelan culture, who may be unknown to you.

Ah, that is fascinating now, isn't it? In all the discussions I've had about the foreign policy of Hugo Chavez, no one has ever brought that up, in that the origin of the term is from Venezuelan popular culture. Fascinating. Doesn't seem to have the degree of gravitas and decorum that the international arena requires, in my opinion...because when discussing the United States with the Venezuelan people, he is bringing the international community into it as a member of the audience, whether he likes it or not.

All the same, it would be like if the President of the US were to start referring to a certain eccentric East Asian dictator with the name of a certain wacky and eccentric James Bond villain....




I agree with this statement, although. Even then, PDVSA is still a state corporation, even if certain people in the goverment manage it as if it belonged to them.

Which is one of the most condemning elements against Mr. Chavez's style of governance.

Sorry, but in the specific case of Venezuela, I have to disagree with your statement. Regarding Venezuela, and as I have specified in this post, the "community of sophisticated and intelligent people, intimately acquainted with a broad base of knowledge, provided from differing perspectives", behaves like a "vast, uneducated bulk".

It is cultural ignorance. The OPEC statement, the Mr. Danger statement, the media statement. Those just proves that the majority of NSG is ignorant about the situation in Venezuela and of the culture of that specific country. Not meant to offend, just to highlight facts.

Ah, but this was as to AP's ideology, and his adherence to Stalinism, not as to his knowledge of Venezuela. I was impeaching his judgment on things political and economic (and humanitarian, too) in nature.

Are you truly that moronic that you think I'm being serious?

Any sane and rational person would be able to tell quite obviously that I was joking, and criticizing the same policies of the same President that all of you guys hate.There's plenty of people here that would seriously advocate such measures. Plus, it's kind of hard to read intonation and sarcasm.

Oh thank you. I hope you won't complain in the future when we keep calling you unintelligent brutes, and elect leaders that speak against your goverment, and call your presidents Mister Danger. Thanks for the help, with that attitude, you are really convoncing me that the United States is an advanced country that believes in democracy. You look better with your mouth shut and your fingers quiet, this coming from a venezuelan.

Are you truly that moronic that you think I'm being serious?

Any sane and rational person would be able to tell quite obviously that I was joking, and criticizing the same policies of the same President that all of you guys hate.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but we're on the same side in this, but you're too stupid to realize that.

Not all Americans are in favor of the bullshit pulled by Bush. And this is coming from a Republican, nonetheless.

Not always. He flat out ignored it when I pointed out that he supports the bourgeoisie in their suppression of the worker class in that one Chinese town he was praising.

An exception rather than the rule. Besides, he didn't attempt to debate it did he? So the point still stands. He just has the option of ignoring inconvenient small little things. Like how reality demonstrates how blatantly false his lies are.

I recalled this article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7115734.stm) incorrectly, sorry about that.

That was last year. Although the relations continue to be stranded and somewhat limited, there are still relations between Venezuela and Colombia. A formal break up is still to happen.

Only in the most vague fashion, I would certainly agree. More than that, Chavez has, at least, attempted to show some degree of solidarity with the American people, never mind that this was done solely for the purpose of creating a sense of pressure on the US government to let up on him a bit.

And to purposedly avoid comparisons with Hitler, or accusaions of racism, or whatever the US goverment could accuse him of. As silly as he might look, Hugo Chávez is not a complete idiot regarding politics. He knows more than a bit, and most of the things he says, is because of a specific purpose.

Ah, that is fascinating now, isn't it? In all the discussions I've had about the foreign policy of Hugo Chavez, no one has ever brought that up, in that the origin of the term is from Venezuelan popular culture. Fascinating. Doesn't seem to have the degree of gravitas and decorum that the international arena requires, in my opinion...because when discussing the United States with the Venezuelan people, he is bringing the international community into it as a member of the audience, whether he likes it or not.

All the same, it would be like if the President of the US were to start referring to a certain eccentric East Asian dictator with the name of a certain wacky and eccentric James Bond villain....

Well, depends. "Doña Bárbara" by Gallegos is considered to be one of the masterpieces of the latinoamerican, and even hispanic, literature of the XX century. More than popular culture, is high brow culture. Although the style of Chávez is quite populist and vulgar, that special reference is not exactly "low culture". It has certain decorum. As I pointed out, it is equally an insult, a stereotypical insult to be more specific, and as such, as elegant said insult can be, lacks both gravitas and decorum in any international arena. Closest comparison would be, as I said, calling Olmert "Shylock", as Shakespeare is well known in english literature, and Shylock is an stereotypical evil jew.

However, I can think of other examples, as calling another leader "Macbeth" to refer that he politically assassinated someone else, or calling a specific party "Big Brother" in reference to 1984.

Are you truly that moronic that you think I'm being serious?

Any sane and rational person would be able to tell quite obviously that I was joking, and criticizing the same policies of the same President that all of you guys hate.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but we're on the same side in this, but you're too stupid to realize that.

Not all Americans are in favor of the bullshit pulled by Bush. And this is coming from a Republican, nonetheless.

If you were kidding or joking, then I take my words back. I'm sorry, but I have seen more than enough in this particular forum as to expect anything from anyone. Plus over the internet, the sarcastic intonation is hard to read, as Laerod said. I would excuse myself saying that english is not my native language and I that have a hard time spotting hidden context inside written words, but that would be a sad excuse.

There's plenty of people here that would seriously advocate such measures. Plus, it's kind of hard to read intonation and sarcasm.seconded.
.
Are you truly that moronic that you think I'm being serious?

Any sane and rational person would be able to tell quite obviously that I was joking, and criticizing the same policies of the same President that all of you guys hate.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but we're on the same side in this, but you're too stupid to realize that.

Not all Americans are in favor of the bullshit pulled by Bush. And this is coming from a Republican, nonetheless.

You only have 162 posts, we hardly know you, You should not call her moronic for not guessing you were being sarcastic.

I have over 20000 posts (on my ## lives), I assume most of NSG know what-I-am-all-about, but I still take the time to add a smiley or some white text to let -the new players- know that I am being sarcastic.

________________________________
oh BTW, Welcome to NSG and enjoy this land of free speech and neverending debate. :cool:

If the leftist enviromentalists just allowed us to drill for oil in the U.S this would not be an issue. Canadians and other leftist countries drill, so I guess the reason OUR leftists don't want us to is to weaken the U.S.



Are you...honostly...that stupid? Please tell me its an act.

If you were kidding or joking, then I take my words back. I'm sorry, but I have seen more than enough in this particular forum as to expect anything from anyone. Plus over the internet, the sarcastic intonation is hard to read, as Laerod said. I would excuse myself saying that english is not my native language and I that have a hard time spotting hidden context inside written words, but that would be a sad excuse.

I was completely joking about that statement, making fun of the way that people in my government do things lately.

It is an out rage the whole thing is. if we cant have oil, then we can't try and build our economy on cars. cars are cool, fast, and flash, whats the point in having cars if we don't have oil=petrol. I declare an against vote, although i don't know how :confused:

Blah blah blah, America sucks the Soviet Union was perfect because they opposed the Ebil Americans blah blah blah.

It never ceases to amaze me that people will justify and deny the most horrific crimes as long as it puts the United States in a bad light.:rolleyes: