steve
i just read economist - Exxcon Mobil posted a net profit of $36.1 billion, the largest in American history. Do you want to talk about Chavez?

Posted by: george at February 11, 2006 12:39 AM

---

Well, you've done quite a hatchet job on this story, but that's to be expected.

A moment's googling reveals that Blair's initial comment about Venezuela responded to a Labour MP's provocative question on whether Blair, a reputed leftist, was happy that governments throughout Latin America were beginning to lean left. Venezuela was offered as a particular case.

Blair owned that the Latin-American leftist tilt did in fact please him--up to a point. He then, obediently, added this qualification:

"It is rather important that the Government of Venezuela realize that if they want to be respected members of the international community, they should abide by the rules of the international community. I say with the greatest respect to the President of Venezuela that when he forms an alliance with Cuba, I would prefer to see Cuba a proper functioning democracy."

A bold stand there from Tony Blair on Cuban democracy, I must say. He's been rather less bold on the decades of economic, military and terrorist hostility directed at Cuba from the United States, however, but I'll leave that aside for now.

Now surely, what set Chavez off was Blair's absolutely hypocritical claim that Venezuela "should abide by the rules of the international community."

Blair, along with Bush, has a record of contempt for 'the rules of the international community,' Iraq being the major recent case in point. He is, in short, in no position to be telling other countries they ought to abide by the same international rules he himself has disregarded.

Finally, I know that you *think* you've answered Chavez' point about the Falklands/Islas Malvinas by citing the Falklands War. Nevertheless, I'll ask why you think it's so outrageous, given the more than two centuries of history here, for someone to claim Britain has violated Argentinian sovereignty.

Chavez is, of course, not above criticism. No political leader is. But your blog post doesn't come within shouting distance of intelligent criticism of the man or his policies.

Posted by: Stephen at February 11, 2006 01:04 AM

---

Chavez is a moonbat. Too bad the CIA is out of the assassin game. They would play Chavez, #1 with a bullet.

I can't see Argentina trying the Falkland Adventure again. Although the British ability to project force into the area is degraded from the 1980's (the retired - but not replaced - Vulcan, long range bomber, for example), Argentina took her lumps - and wont try that again.

The discovery of oil in the territorial waters of the Falkland Islands, makes it highly unlikely that the UK would give them up without a fight. As each year, the technology to extract that oil comes closer to reality.

Next he will be asking the United States to give Texas and California back to Mexico. That's just as likely, as the UK giving up the Falklands.

Posted by: Curtis at February 11, 2006 01:39 AM

---

curtis i hate when any fuc,,, takes my money

Posted by: george at February 11, 2006 01:44 AM

---

Who took your money, George?

Posted by: Curtis at February 11, 2006 02:03 AM

---

>>Well, you've done quite a hatchet job on this story, but that's to be expected.

Would you care to explain exactly where it is in this post that Janke said anything that was historically inaccurate?

Posted by: CERDIP at February 11, 2006 08:48 AM

---

The Argentinians must be thrilled to have such a good friend speak up for them. Someone should tell Chavez about imperialist Canada stealing that important island( the name escapes me) from Denmark. This is what CNN needs right now, a two front war, with no USA involvement. This war would be a welcome tonic to those of us who will suffer from the inevitable post olympic letdown.
Let'er rip, fellas!

Posted by: dmorris at February 11, 2006 11:26 AM

---

Its called Hans Island...

What claim does argentina have on the Falkland islands? Possession is 9/10ths of the law. England has governed these Islands for over 200 years, shouldn't a territorial claim - like milk - have an expiration date? Gibraltar, the same issue. Spain gave it up in a treaty, in the 1700's, yet continues to moan about English imperialism... (more Ironic, as their are Spanish cities in Morocco - that Spain feels no need to return to Morocco. )

The Iraq situation is perfectly legal and within the norms of international law.... The first gulf war, never really ended, it has been in a cease fire. Saddam agreed to a cease fire, and to allow arms inspectors in. When he threw out the arms inspectors, he violated the terms of the cease fire. When a government proves itself unable to negotiate an end to a war, the only way to end the war is to remove the offending government.

Posted by: Curtis at February 11, 2006 12:31 PM

---

Hugo Chavez should not be encouraged in any way, shape or form. He isn't just a leftist, he is a Castro in training. A Castro with oil. It simply amazes me how mouthy these guys are when they have money in the form of oil.

Hugo should help Argentina take those islands back or shut up. Maggie Thatcher and the UK proved once and for all that the British lion still has bite...Argentina, Venezuela and other confused South American "democracies" should worry about building something instead of spouting off how about how the US and the UK have "hurt" them.

Posted by: Mark in Bowmanville at February 11, 2006 01:32 PM

---

Chavez, you communist moonbat, ever heard of paying for what you want? It's called free enterprize.

You want the Falklands returend to Argentina?

We are easy. Bring you National treasury along and get ready to commit to signing off future oil production and we can do a deal.

If you want something for nothing, and I suspect you do, the answer is F R off! TG

Posted by: TonyGuitar at February 11, 2006 09:19 PM

---

Diplomaticly speaking, Dear Presidete Chavez,
We regret the likelyhood of a return of the Falklands seems to be somewhat unlikely at the present time.

However, in future discussions we could come to some small mutually agreeable agreements based in fairness and understanding that may lead to Argentinians to visit the Falklands as tourists. Int. affairs UK

Posted by: TonyGuitar at February 11, 2006 09:26 PM

---

Curtis wrote:

"The Iraq situation is perfectly legal and within the norms of international law.... The first gulf war, never really ended, it has been in a cease fire. Saddam agreed to a cease fire, and to allow arms inspectors in. When he threw out the arms inspectors, he violated the terms of the cease fire. When a government proves itself unable to negotiate an end to a war, the only way to end the war is to remove the offending government."

Well, this is certainly close to the case made by the United States, Britain and Australia, but there are many other governments and even prominent voices from within those countries who strongly disagreed that this case met the standard for the use of armed force.

Prominent scholars in international law disagreed sharply with the US/UK position that Saddam's 'material breaches' of his obligation gave the 'coalition of the willing' the right to attack without specific Security Council endorsement. It is, to say the least, far from obvious that the Iraq situation was 'perfectly legal.' Within the UK itself, the top legal experts at both Cambridge and Oxford publicly opposed Tony Blair's cooperation with George Bush in this matter, to name but two.

I'm sorry, but I can't agree with your interpretation of the legal situation surrounding the Iraq invasion. Therefore, I frankly think Tony Blair is one of the last people who should be telling other countries' governments to follow international law, when his own record is so poor.

Curtis also wrote:

"What claim does argentina have on the Falkland islands? Possession is 9/10ths of the law. England has governed these Islands for over 200 years, shouldn't a territorial claim - like milk - have an expiration date?"

As I understand matters, the Argentinians claimed them from the date of their independence in 1816. They started a settlement and a penal colony, which was destroyed in the 1830s by the US over a fishing dispute. The British then moved in (70 years or so after their first visit) and expelled the remaining Argentinians. So, you're right to point to the long history of British rule, but I'm not sure I agree that the length of an injustice makes it any less unjust.

I'm not putting Curtis in this category, but I often find that it's the powerful and their apologists who want us not to look at history, telling us we should focus on the present or the future rather than long-ago crimes and abuses. Their reasons for doing so are obvious: they're often the ones who benefited from those same crimes and abuses, and would rather people wouldn't talk about those embarassing facts.

Again, whatever one thinks of Chavez' other points, he's certainly correct to point out that Britain has a long history of uninvited interference in the affairs of other sovereign states, as does the US itself.

This brings me to my final point. The poster from Bowmanville wrote:

"Argentina, Venezuela and other confused South American "democracies" should worry about building something instead of spouting off how about how the US and the UK have "hurt" them."

In fact, 'building something' is exactly what some of them have been about when major outside powers have intervened with violence to stop the building because it threatened their control over the region.

The US has been the principal intervenor since the declaration of the Monroe Docrtine, but other powers have done their part as well in the Latin American-Caribbean region over the last 200 years.

Many, many people in El Salvador, the Dominican Republic, Panama, Grenada, Nicaragua, Haiti, Guatemala and elsewhere know from painful experience how powerful nations (like the US) have indeed hurt them over the last decades.

It's easy to dismiss Chavez, as some in this thread have done (though not all, to be sure), as a 'moonbat' and a 'communist.' It's slightly more difficult, obviously, to try and understand the historical context behind what he's saying.

Posted by: Stephen at February 12, 2006 12:04 AM

---

To demolish your argument completely, may I point out that you make refrence to history as emarassing, abuses and facts.

You are correct about facts and abuses and they are true history.

You avoid the mention of values and context of those times in Argentinian history.

Abuses were common on all sides in those times. That alone destroys any reasons of embarassment.

Your argument supposes embarassment due to guilt looking back from today*s perspective.

For your argument to be valid requires that we re-write the facts of Argentine history in the changed moral values of today.

Nice try for the guilt trip token, but sorry, no banana. TG

Posted by: TonyGuitar at February 12, 2006 01:47 AM

---

Stephen. I do not mean to be harsh. This is only debate. You talk about hurt imposed upon Central American countries.

If they had been allowed to fall to a communist control, do you think there would have been no *hurt*?

Were you never aware of the massive *hurt* spread over dozens of countries in the iron-fisted grip of communism from the times of Marx, Lenin,Stalin, Kruschiev and others?

Have you never heard of .. well you know. TG

Posted by: TonyGuitar at February 12, 2006 01:59 AM

---

The Falklands have NEVER been Argentinian.

Posted by: WImpy Canadian at February 13, 2006 07:50 AM

---

Stephen, I got sidetracked. What I meant to say is that scholars in international law,[no names?] who you say decided Tony Blair was wrong in moving against Saddam, cited there was no evidence to do so.

Genocide gassing of Iraqi Kurds, not to mention the ghastly pillage and rape of Kuwaite citizens is adequate grounds for stopping the madman Saddam.

Were your *international experts* only considering the lack of WMD due to their being whisked away over the Syrian border?

What an hopelessly empty logic. TG

Posted by: TonyGuitar at February 13, 2006 09:57 AM

---