www.CostaRicaTicas.com

Hey, ID, I actually agree with your main point that anything that Chavez says along these lines is mostly bluster.

Certain PARTS of his comments suggest that any military action taken on his country's part would be a conditional reaction IF its diplomatic envoy was kidnapped or killed or its embassy attacked:
Apparently, this is the part you were refering to when you were responding to JB's post. And, I'd have to say that reaction would be somewhat understandable or at least I could see the US possibly reacting militarily if one of its embassies were attacked or its diplomats kidnapped (as we did in Iran after half a year and many failed attempts at negotiation). You said in your first post that "the Honduran army is not going to make any moves against either." and that is probably true. However, according to the article you just posted, "Chavez said Honduran soldiers took away the Cuban ambassador and left the Venezuelan ambassador on the side of a road after beating him ..." (which probably was what prompted his other statement). So who really knows what the Hondurans might do or what it would take for Chavez to "justify" mixing into Honduran politics (more than he already has). For example, we can be reasonably certain that Chavez has been supporting FARC in Colombia (and probably other opposition movements in other Latin countries who have not allied themselves with his "Bolivarean Revolution"). Chavez NEVER said those would be the ONLY conditions under which he MIGHT act militarily AND some of his other comments at least SUGGEST that he is THREATENING other SERIOUS unspecified actions ("whatever it takes") if the Honduran army does not back down:


The US may not have the best history in Latin America, particularly under Bush and Reagan, but this bellicosity stands in direct contrast to how Obama has reacted to another democratic crisis in Iran.

Jamrock, knowing what way political winds are blowing is not necessarily the same thing as actually trying to direct those winds. I'm sure the US is not overly upset that a Chavez ally has been knocked down but that doesn't mean they helped orchestrate it OR that we are happy that it took military action to acheive that end rather than the force of the democracy we normally espouse. Whether we express our disapproval of the coup or offer support (or make excuses) for what the Honduran military has done, certain parties (Chavez et al) are going to paint it as part of the Great Yankee Imperialistic Conspiracy. Who knows maybe they're partly right. However, short of much more credible evidence, I doubt any covert influences we might have in Honduras (or Iran) would be able to acheive the sort of opposition we have seen without our fingerprints being all over it. It was actually the Honduran military that has spoken here not the people, but there were street protests numbering in the thousands that were going on before this coup took place.

Thanks exactly what I was trying to say but you do it more Eloquently that I did. I don’t mean the we sanctioned it. When a Democratic elected Government anywhere around the world is over thrown. It is bad. But for a long time the State Department has been saying that this guy was putting the future of the country and the people in great jeopardy. The military always watches the government and they always acts to protect their country and its people so once again they have exercise their due diligence on behalf of it people. To make sure Democracy rules.

Just my opinion no actual facts..

_________________
"THE TRUTH IS' EVERYBODY IS GOING TO HURT YOU. YOU JUST GOTTA FIND THE ONE WORTH SUFFERING FOR"
Robert Nesta Marley

Question..

Is Honduras a Democracy or Republic.?

PIDD

I don't think those terms are mutually exclusive. The Republica de Costa Rica is a democratic form of government for example. I believe Honduras is also.

_________________
Pura Vida
Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four
essential food groups:
alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat.
Alex Levine

It has also been known as "The USS Honduras" because of the conveniently located U.S. military base and the country's proximity to potential hotspots like Nicaragua, Panama and El Salvador. Perfect for destabilizing an unfriendly regime, protecting a canal and even the occasional mining of a harbor

_________________
"All them women gonna make me,
teach 'em what they don't know how..." TMIB

My understanding is , if I can remember by civics classes, in a democracy the majority ( 51%) has absolute rule over the minority(49%) vs a republic where the majority can not take away protect rights ( constitution) from the minority.

example.. in a strict democracy 51% can vote the other 49% into slavery wherein a republic 90% can not vote the other 10% into slavery when slavery is prohibited by a constitution

It doesn't matter what a government calles itself ( democratic republic, socialist republic, republic republic) , it's how it operates that governs.

I'm not sureof the practice in Honduras.

PIDD

Interesting read- http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124623220955866301.html

_________________

Living well is the best revenge
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwUtj_YnNoY

Some other interesting viewpoints.

New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/world ... ml?_r=1&hp

BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8125726.stm

_________________
"All them women gonna make me,
teach 'em what they don't know how..." TMIB

The key sentence I got from one of the NYTimes picture captions was "The move to oust the President came unexpectedly." What I got from that was that the Congress and the Supreme Court using the Army acted with quickness, catching Srs. Zelaya and Chavez off-guard before their plans could be enacted--I suspect they had a "Reichstag fire" scenario in mind, provoking a Constitutional crisis that they would control and "solve" by lengthening Sr. Zelaya's term and subsequent re-election.

BTW, what's with somebody besides me quoting the NYTimes and the WSJ?--not that they are my exclusive province, you understand...

_________________
"A man accustomed to hear only the echo of his own sentiments, soon bars all the common avenues of delight, and has no part in the general gratification of mankind"--Dr. Johnson
"Amen, brother"-ED

Well, I don't waste my time with the local rags like the LA Times. Reading both the WSJ and the NYT with some BBC gives a decent overview of the differing perspectives.

Good story from CNN.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/ ... index.html

This segment makes the most sense to me:

Despite widespread condemnation for the coup, analysts see plenty of blame to go around -- and no easy solution.

"There are no heroes in this story," said Larry Birns, director of the Washington-based Council on Hemispheric Affairs. "These people are caricatures of rectitude rather than examples of it."

The Honduran Supreme Court, he said, is "one of the most corrupt institutions in Latin America."

And Zelaya overplayed his hand, Birns and others said.

"Zelaya was part of the problem," said Peter Hakim, president of the Inter-American Dialogue policy institute. "He's partly responsible for what happened. He was pushing too hard on a very fragile political institution. He was just plowing ahead against the wishes of every political institution, including his own political party."

Zelaya's removal also raises larger issues for many fragile Latin American democracies.

"What happens when the Supreme Court decides against the president and the president ignores it? Who enforces it?" asked Robert Pastor, a Latin America national security adviser for President Jimmy Carter in the late 1970s.

What happens next is clearly unknown.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Monday that an OAS delegation would travel to Honduras as early as Tuesday to begin working on restoring a constitutional government.

That might not be an easy task.

"According to mainstream Honduran media sources, Zelaya's removal has the widespread support of the political and business elite and the military, and it appears doubtful that he will be able to return to power," said Heather Berkman, an analyst with the Eurasia Group consulting firm.

"An exit strategy is needed," Birns said. "But it's going to be extremely difficult to come out with an exit strategy unless they get consent of key players like the national legislature."

Pastor holds out some hope. "I don't think it's impossible," he said.

Said Hakim: "You can never put the toothpaste back in the tube. But you can provide a peaceful transition process."

_________________
"All them women gonna make me,
teach 'em what they don't know how..." TMIB

There was an article today in El Colombiano. It said that Zelaya will be heading back to Honduras this coming Thursday. He's asked that the OAS President accompany him there.

When he steps off the plane, the military ought to throw his ass in jail. Before he was ousted, he had the option to leave the country or be imprisoned. I guess he changed his mind and wants to make a spectacle of being a political prisoner.

Different Civic classes for different folks.

"A republic is a state or country that is not led by a monarch, in which the people (or at least a part of its people) have an impact on its government. The word 'republic' is derived from the Latin phrase res publica which can be translated as "public affairs".

Both modern and ancient republics vary widely in their ideology and composition. The most common definition of a republic is a state without a monarch, In republics such as the US and France the executive is legitimated both by a constitution and by popular suffrage. In the United States Founding Fathers like James Madison defined republic in terms of representative democracy as opposed to direct democracy, and this usage is still employed by many viewing themselves as "republicans". In modern political science, republicanism refers to a specific ideology that is based on civic virtue and is considered distinct from ideologies such as liberalism."

Still do not think the terms are mutually exclusive.

_________________
Pura Vida
Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four
essential food groups:
alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat.
Alex Levine

I agree with ID on this. I'd also question your slant of democracies being some sort of tyranny of the majority over the minority (okay those were my words, but that was essentially what you were suggesting).

What is a "strict democracy" any way? "One-man one-vote"? "The majority rules"? Who should rule instead? The minority? The distinction that I always got from my civics classes is that, whatever democracy's shortcomings, it was infinitely better than previous governmental forms where the minority (often a minority of one) ruled over the majority (Monarchies, Oligarchies, Dictatorships, Theocracies etc.). And then there are "Republics" like the USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist REPUBLICS) where an unelected or at best quasi-elected congress or Politburo chooses their leader and that leader maintains his position through authoritarian means.

Most "strict" or true Democracies are Representive or Constitutional Democracies and have some sort of protection for minority rights. For example, in the US we have the Bill of Rights which applies to EVERYONE not just the majority and it would take much more than a simple majority to change the Constitution to enslave anybody. Even IF a simple majority theoretically could enslave half the population, it is much less likely the more that all adults in the population have a say in their governance. One should remember that even in the US, women, who make up half of our population didn't see any real advancement in their rights until after they were given the right to vote by the 19th amendment in 1920. Blacks were not given the right to vote by the 15th amendment until 5 years AFTER the Civil War led to the abolition of slavery by the 13th amendment. Even after that, blacks were DENIED their democratic rights by such things as literacy tests, poll taxes and gerrymandering and it was only after those barriers to true democracy were removed that they got their civil rights. In short, the closest thing we have to insuring that minorities AREN'T discriminated against is true and strict democracy.

If that 51% rule that defines a democracy is 51% of money and power, then we live in what Brother Pidd defines as a democracy--because it's sure enough true. The Golden Rule--"He who has the gold (and power to control), rules". If you think otherwise ponder the radical changes that should have been made to our financial system--and weren't. Profits crimped a bit--yes; taking the power out of the hands of those who so grossly and egregiously misused it--no.

_________________
"A man accustomed to hear only the echo of his own sentiments, soon bars all the common avenues of delight, and has no part in the general gratification of mankind"--Dr. Johnson
"Amen, brother"-ED

The events unfolding here could set some sort of precedent that is beneficial to the countries of Latin America, or a harbinger of doom.,. depending on your point of view. I do know that the governments of many South american countries keep the militia in-line.. so to speak, as the enforcers of the law or rulings of their judicial systems.

My cousins in Venezuela have very strong views on this situation, and also I believe are keeping a watchful eye on how things progress. Here is an example: (from one of the popular message boards I go to)

Una de las bases de la democracia es la alternabilidad en el poder... lo contrario es una receta criolla inventada por Chavez. Por eso es totalmente coherente que la constitución hondureña considere un delito la infracción a tal norma. Los líderes de gobierno y de organizaciones internacionales son unos descarados. Yo en lo personal no salgo de mi INDIGNACIÓN de sus intereses personalistas!! Chavez los controla a todos!!

Respondiendo a la pregunta de ¿Por qu... Read Moreé no ha más apoyo internacional? La respuesta es simple, todos los involucrados tienen intereses personalistas, el muy bien calificado por Chávez de pendejo José Miguel Insulza, quiere ser reelecto, otro más que quiere quedarse en el poder, debe ser que yo nunca he bebido de ese elixir de poder porque no conozco su hechizo, te recomiendo 2 artículos sin perdida que leí hoy con respecto a las ansias de poder de todo el mundo, el caudillismo y el NO golpe de Honduras: http://www.noticierodigital.com/?p=39548 y el otro sin desperdicios es http://www.noticierodigital.com/?p=39545



I get the main idea of what they are concerned of . . the change in power and what happens next. If anyone else would like to illuminate...

_________________
Enzo

Now in High Definition!