History of prefacing a conflict repeating itself

a reply to: Tartuffe

Nope. We're rather supposed to believe that Maduro deployed flamethrowers against this assembly on a deserted bridge, and a violent crowd throwing Molotov cocktails isn't enough for you to question the official narrative.

That's right! Just ignore the track-record of US wars for freedom and you'll be fine.

a reply to: CriticalStinker.

[...]
This is not the first time our government and our media have conspired to drag the American people into war with another country—or helped create a coup that will inevitably have disastrous results. So I thought this would be a prime moment to go through the top four greatest hits.
[...]

We Are Being Lied Into War Again

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: Tartuffe

So we can operate under the assumption the liquid soaked rag left the bottle and landed on the truck.

The backs of the trucks are canvas or tarp covered. Can that not be ignited by a rag soaked in flammable liquid?


So since you don't have any video to dispute this, do you have an article that explains how Venezuelan government did this? What did they use?

Do you have anything to go on other than some tweets from Bolton and Rubio?

Good point. Indeed, a canvas tarp could light on fire from a burning, fuel-soaked rag. I never thought about that.

According to some protestors, the national guard doused the tarps in fuel.

In one dramatic high point, a group of activists led by exiled lawmakers managed to escort three flatbed trucks of aid past the halfway point into Venezuela when they were repelled by security forces. In a flash the cargo caught fire, with some eyewitnesses claiming the National Guardsmen doused a tarp covering the boxes with gas before setting it on fire. As a black cloud rose above, the activists — protecting their faces from the fumes with vinegar-soaked cloths — unloaded the boxes by hand in a human chain stretching back to the Colombian side of the bridge.

[...]

“They burned the aid and fired on their own people,” said 39-year-old David Hernandez, who was hit in the forehead with a tear gas canister that left a bloody wound and growing welt. “That’s the definition of dictatorship.”

www.apnews.com...

a reply to: PublicOpinion

Nope. We're rather supposed to believe that Maduro deployed flamethrowers against this assembly on a deserted bridge, and a violent crowd throwing Molotov cocktails isn't enough for you to question the official narrative. That's right! Just ignore the track-record of US wars for freedom and you'll be fine.

Yet you're repeating the official story of the Maduro regime. This "violent crowd" was trying to get the aid trucks to the other side while being fired upon because people are starving and need medicine.

a reply to: Tartuffe

Personally, I think the evidence is leaning towards one direction... That being said, we are at the mercy of conflicting reports, and I have an opinion on which one I'm leaning towards.

Is it fair to say that Bolton, Pompeo, Rubio, and MSM ran a story they had no evidence on other than some eye witness reports?

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: Tartuffe

Personally, I think the evidence is leaning towards one direction... That being said, we are at the mercy of conflicting reports, and I have an opinion on which one I'm leaning towards.

Is it fair to say that Bolton, Pompeo, Rubio, and MSM ran a story they had no evidence on other than some eye witness reports?

I think that's completely fair, and if Greenwald and yourself want to claim the protesters are lying, I think that's fine too. However, I don't think we should believe the opposite simply because the NYT is telling us what their reconstruction "suggests".

a reply to: Tartuffe

As if those 3 trucks would make a difference. Where was your protest regarding the sanctions btw? Don't gimme this hypocrite strawman while running warmonger talking-points, please?

Maybe we can do something when they separate babies from their incubat... wait! Could you try to solve the humanitarian crisis at your border first, or would that be too much to ask for?

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: Tartuffe

As if those 3 trucks would make a difference. Where was your protest regarding the sanctions btw? Don't gimme this hypocrite strawman while running warmonger talking-points, please?

Maybe we can do something when they separate babies from their incubat... wait! Could you try to solve the humanitarian crisis at your border first, or would that be too much to ask for?

It's great when people in first-world countries tell starving people what will and will not make a difference.

I get it, you think the protesters are lying, and the exodus of Venezuelan's, their plight, their opposition to the dictatorial regime oppressing them, is all some US conspiracy for oil and war. The problem is, you're siding with the oppressors, not the oppressed.

a reply to: Tartuffe

The problem is, you're siding with the oppressors, not the oppressed.

Side with any government involved in this instance and you're siding with an oppressor.

Is his regime oppressive? Absolutely.

But some guy claims to be president and we sanction them for millions a day while throwing a few trucks of aid their way and act like a saint? I don't buy it.

This is a shady situation all around, but don't tell me there aren't nefarious reasons behind our involvement... They're not the only oppressed dictator ship on the planet.

a reply to: Tartuffe

Is that the problem?

Here's a solution for the people: lift all sanctions and have the OSCE observe elections? You're quick with jumping to conclusions, can you cut the bread quick as well?

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: Tartuffe

The problem is, you're siding with the oppressors, not the oppressed.

Side with any government involved in this instance and you're siding with an oppressor.

Is his regime oppressive? Absolutely.

But some guy claims to be president and we sanction them for millions a day while throwing a few trucks of aid their way and act like a saint? I don't buy it.

This is a shady situation all around, but don't tell me there aren't nefarious reasons behind our involvement... They're not the only oppressed dictator ship on the planet.

Sanctions are against state officials, mostly for human rights abuses. If he wants to save his people from pain and suffering he'll have to step down. Seems like an easy solution.

But no, he holds sham elections, suppresses dissent, and leads with an iron fist in order to stay in power. But it's our fault?

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: Tartuffe

Is that the problem?

Here's a solution for the people: lift all sanctions and have the OSCE observe elections? You're quick with jumping to conclusions, can you cut the bread quick as well?

I don't think giving Maduro exactly what he wants is the right solution.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

The election was mainly observed by allies of the Venezuelan government after many international bodies decided that there were no democratic guarantees in the country; the United Nations declined the invitation to monitor the election,[38] after members of the opposition asked the UN not to send observers.[41] On 23 March 2018 a United Nations official informed that the organization would not offer electoral assistance in the elections, without explaining the motives. Spokesperson Farhan Haq stated that a letter was sent to Venezuelan authorities regarding the request of electoral experts, but did not explain the content.[42] These observers included the Latin American Council on Electoral Experts, Common Frontiers, Unifor, former Prime Minister of Spain José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, and former President of Ecuador Rafael Correa

wiki

That's not a dictatorship.
That's the foreplay in a conspiracy the usual suspects contrived.

a reply to: Tartuffe

Sanctions are against state officials, mostly for human rights abuses. If he wants to save his people from pain and suffering he'll have to step down. Seems like an easy solution.

It's also against Venezuelan oil from being sold in the US.

But no, he holds sham elections, suppresses dissent, and leads with an iron fist in order to stay in power. But it's our fault?

Sounds like nations we are allies with.

Either way it's not our place to prop up some who play ball and have different rules for others.

We're not angels, we aren't the merchants of freedom.

Iraq doesn't look any better now.

I'd take Maduro over Guaido any day and the thought of the USA bringing democracy to any country is appalling. I also find it funny that any government that doesn't suit the agenda of the USA suddenly becomes a regime. Those bleeding hearts in Washington are anything but.
There is a sickness that runs through our governments and we seem powerless to stop it.

I hate to burst anyone's bubble here but this is not just the US government playbook for war, it is the playbook for war since war was invented. Those that profit from it spread lies, and either illegitimately invade, or if they are even more naive they believe their own lies and invade 'righteously.'

It is the history of planet Earth and part of the reason we are on the planet,to learn via suffering. Those that learn from this don't come back here and then the new souls repeat their mistakes. Over and over and over.

See WW2, WW1, Napoleonic wars, Crusades, Roman imperialism, Alexander the Great, tribal warfare etc etc.

I'm used to it by now. its the function of the material plane on Earth.

originally posted by: chris_stibrany

See WW2, WW1, Napoleonic wars, Crusades, Roman imperialism, Alexander the Great, tribal warfare etc etc.

I'm used to it by now. its the function of the material plane on Earth.

So we're a primal country unable to better ourselves, or be better than prior examples of humanity?

a reply to: CriticalStinker

It's also against Venezuelan oil from being sold in the US.

Sanctions on Venezuelan oil took effect a little over a month ago, long after the crisis in Venezuela started.

Sounds like nations we are allies with.

Either way it's not our place to prop up some who play ball and have different rules for others.

We're not angels, we aren't the merchants of freedom.

Iraq doesn't look any better now.

Nations we are allied with do not expel diplomats and spread anti-American conspiracy theories.

Either way, we have yet to invade and there is little indication that we will, so any point about Iraq or these "lies" being a precursor to war are moot.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
It's absolutely reckless what the Media and Government do to beat the drums of war. Peoples lives are at stake, and it gets played out like theater until it becomes a war theater.

Assuming you're correct, the next logical step would be for there to be a terrorist attack somewhere (Texas?) that can be used as an excuse for an invasion.

Let's see if that happens.

a reply to: CriticalStinker


Almost.

Humans in general, as a race, are primal. When individuals better themselves, I see no indication that this ever translates to the larger populace. If it does, say if you view the ancient Greek civilisation at their height of Pythagoreanism/Platonism/Hermeticsim as an example, it doesn't last long enough to make any true betterment of humanity and our values. We always sink back down into being primal. It is an ebb and a flow that repeats and that is never ever going to change.

originally posted by: vinifalou
a reply to: CriticalStinker

So you believe what is happening in Venezuela is a fabricated scenario?

I read a couple of years ago that Venezuala's moneyed classes were going to choke the national commerce by simply not participating in the economy. This would eventually create the conditions for the government to fall. And so it happened.