December 18, 2009

ROAD TO SERFDOM VS ROAD TO HELL

In Copenhagen, Hugo Chavez got a standing ovation when he said this:

“our revolution seeks to help all people…socialism, the other ghost that is probably wandering around this room, that’s the way to save the planet, capitalism is the road to hell....let’s fight against capitalism and make it obey us.”

We're boned.

Read Conrad Black's When Summits Used to Matter.

Posted by: Sarah at 09:06 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 67 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Of course, he's preaching to a bunch of the richest dictators on the planet.  And they applaud because... why again?  Oh, right!  Because every bit of power they take from the US and other non-craphole countries is more power they can take for themselves.

Kind of like the UN - an organization we expect to be democratic and fair when it's populated by a bunch of strongarm thugs.

Yeah, sure.  How they govern at home shouldn't preclude their good behavior and intentions when given power over OTHER countries.  Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

Um, whatever.

You know what Venezuela needs from us in the US?  A coupon for Hugo to get that laser skin resurfacing.  It won't shut him up, but at least we can eat without the urge to vomit whenever the news cuts to one of his ridiculous diatribes.


Posted by: airforcewife at December 18, 2009 11:24 AM (uE3SA)

2 As kevin would say, "We won!"

As K-Lo wrote,

It's the president of Venezuela at a global summit our president is now attending.

Was Obama standing and clapping? What were they clapping for? What Charles Krauthammer called a "shakedown: the transfer of hundreds of billions from the industrial West to the Third World to save the planet".

AFW wrote,

Because every bit of power they take from the US and other non-craphole countries is more power they can take for themselves.

And the US loves to give.


"I hope more than anything you will be able to focus on the people of this country [Afghanistan]. That's what this is all about."

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

Yup, it's all about the 52st state. (Iraq is the 51st. Both may be last but not least! See below.)

And they love to ask:

The tribal leaders also made a pitch for a hydroelectric dam to go along with one the U.S. built here in the 1950s. Mullen made no promises, but said he'd see what he could do.

Whatever happened to that old dam?

The disastrous effects of dam-building were visible in 1949 and only became more obvious as the project grew. But camouflaged by dreams of Pashtun ascendancy and invisible American influence, HAVA [Helmand and Arghandab Valley Authority] was as resilient as modernization theory itself, able to survive repeated debunkings while shedding the blame and the memory of failure.

Proponents of a fresh nation-building venture in Afghanistan, unaware of the results of the last one, have resurrected its imaginings.

Oh well, just build a new one for them. And another. Even if we can't afford it (via Diana West). Your tax dollars at work:

Remember "blood for oil," the anti-war mantra of the Left? "Blood not for oil" is more like it. Not only did Paul Wolfowitz's prediction that Iraq would pay for its own reconstruction with oil revenue never come true; not only did the United States never get to fill up one crummy Humvee for free; but when Iraq staged one of the biggest oil auctions in history last week, U.S. companies left empty-handed. Russia, China and Europe came out the big winners.

"Strange," said industry experts, which is one word for it. What's also shocking is Iraq's apparent willingness to denigrate the United States by showing favoritism to hostile nations (that sacrificed nothing in Iraq's war), and disregard for American interests in the war's (supposed) aftermath.

Such benefactor-abuse fits a pattern of what you might call Iraqi de-Americanization.

[...]

U.S. government reconstruction spending, of course, equals taxpayer dollars. Beyond our incredible largesse -- which (not including the astronomical cost of the war itself) comes to $53 billion, much of which is headed down the drain as Iraqis show little capacity to maintain U.S.-provided public works projects -- one market analyst told the Times, "U.S. private investors have become negligible players in Iraq." Meanwhile, Turkey, the nation that  prevented U.S. troops from transiting through during the initial invasion, has become a major commercial player in Iraq. Likewise Iran, the nuke-seeking, genocide-promising  nation that fomented much of the war, particularly the IED war, on U.S. forces in Iraq.

[...]

And the United States? More like an old shoe now than anything else. Which reminds me: After that Iraqi "journalist" threw his shoes at then-President Bush, The Scotsman newspaper reported that the Istanbul-based shoe manufacturer received orders from around the world, including an incredible 120,000 orders from Iraq.

What's that old Middle Eastern saying -- The shoe of my enemy's enemy is my shoe?

(Re)read Sarah's "HE IS NOT THERE TO 'SERVE' THEM". No American should 'serve' a foreign nation.

Our country is too generous. The Chavezes, and yes, the Afghans and the Iraqis know this and take advantage of us.

Shrug, Atlas, shrug!

Posted by: Amritas at December 18, 2009 05:17 PM (dWG01)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
45kb generated in CPU 0.03, elapsed 0.1417 seconds.
48 queries taking 0.1165 seconds, 133 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.