Chavez's Citizen Militias

"Chavez's 'citizen militias' on the march"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4635187.stm

This is disturbing, aside from the waste of money in weapons mentioned in the article, this group is starting to sound like an early version of the "Dignity Batallions" (Batallones de la Dignidad) from the days of Noriega in Panama. They would do ridiculous marches and display their training on the "national" channel, help beat up kids during anti government protests, and did a lot of looting after the invasion.

A war with Venezuela would be over in less than a month, maybe be finished in a week to be quite honest.

Chavez is just trying to create the impression the US wants to invade and/or kill him, so other 3rd world countries keep rallying around him. "El Loco Chavez" is a nut, but not a dumb one. Unfortunately the US has been asleep at the wheel when it comes to Latin America, so I'm hoping the opossition does take care of this guy soon.

Where did I say I want the US to "destabilize" Venezuela?

Don't tell me you buy into the Chavez opposition == US lackeys nonsense he keeps ranting about.

When I say the US has been asleep at the wheel in Latin America is that we are not involved and have lost influence in the region. Engagement with Latin America doesn't mean the US does deals with characters like Noriega.

Many of the events that led to that "coup" attempt were caused by Chavez's supporters.

Was the US happy that there was a cue attempt? Did it give some aid to the opposition? Was it somehow involved? I don't doubt it at all, but that doesn't invalidate that there is a large section (even if you go by the results of the last election) section of the population that form a legitimate opposition movement.

The way some make it sound, there is no true opposition and everything that sounds like opposition in Venezuela must be US funded and directed. This is stupid.

I'm not saying the US should go back to those days, I'm just saying that ignoring Latin America is not a good way to conduct policy with countries in the same side of the world. The Clinton administration was not too intereted in the region, and this one I'm not even sure if they are aware it exists.

I would say there's a big difference between Venezuela and Iraq. Unless they somehow manufacture Hispanic suicide bombers, I don't see how a conflict here would be similar at all. BTW, I'm not saying the US should invade Venezuela, it won't.

And no, the US is not trying to kill Chavez. Of course he likes to say that all the time, and he would actually welcome a (failed) attempt on his life, to bolster his popularity in the "3rd world".

But ... assuming the article is true ... most of the accusations are that the opposition had contact with some members of the US administration, or that it notified it about the attempt.

Is that it?

It's not really saying that this was coordinated by Washington, or even that money was given to pay off military officials or anything of that type.

It's always a bad sign when a Latin American country has:

o A militaristic president, or strong general in power
o "State" media
o An army and military buildup in a country that hardly needs a military
o Political signs that say "win or die" or have the words "revolution" in them
o Civilian militias

It is unreasonable, and it's disturbing. The last thing that country needs is armed groups of Chavez supporters roaming around thinking they're little Che Guevaras.

Chavez needs to stop wasting money in more weapons for his country, and stop promising to spill Venezuela blood in case Bolivia, Cuba, Lebanon or Iran are attacked (I'm sure I'm missing other countries in his list).

Not necessary for guerilla warfare, but I was comparing to Iraq, were suicide attacks are not the whole strategy against the US, but a significant part of the tactics.

It's extremely unlikely, Latin American culture and religious heritage is incompatible with this type of tactic. Religious based political ideology in the region tends to be more liberal and leftist, than fundamentalist like in the Middle East. This is something that I just don't even see how they would encourage people to do, it's not compatible at all. Even if it "came down to it" (whatever that means).

There is very little political ideology behind what's going on in Venezuela, it's mostly about a personality. You could argue that if a country was going to invade, killing Chavez would be a big part of the "strategy".

Venezuela is not Iraq. I would compare Venezuela like my own country of Panama, although Venezuela is probably much less pro American than the Panama of the late 80s. There's just no scenario that Venezuela would turn into something like Vietnam or Iraq in case of an invasion. Not to mention the population of Venezuela is not as used to war and fighting as other parts of the world, specially the middle east.

Now if you were talkinga bout invading Colombia, now we're talking about a much bigger mess, but Colombia != Venezuela.

BTW - I'm not advocating invading Venezuela or assasinating Chavez in any way at all. I rather the people of Venezuela kick him out of power rather than to force it from the outside.

It depends entirely on the country being invaded.

From what I know about Venezuela, and Latin America in general, it doesn't seem like it would be that hard to break their military and place a government that won't cause total civil war or fuel an Iraqi like insurgency.

You also won't see droves of foreign fighters from the region trying to joing the fight against the US.

Again, it's a very different situation. Which, if you go next door to a country like Colombia, becomes much more difficult due to it's history and the amount of fighting the people in that country are used to.

Venezuelan society is sort of pro-US, depise all the rethoric from the govenment. In addition, the population there is not used to guerilla or civil war like some parts of Central America and even a more violent place like neighbor Colombia.

I'm sure the "state owned" media is much better!

Of course, obviously state controlled media and censorship are the answer!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Mar27.html *

"Venezuela — Aumentan las restricciones a la libertad de expresión" (Restrictions on freedom of speech increase)
http://hrw.org/spanish/press/2005/venezuela.html


And I love the corporate-owned media from Venezuela, they give us novelas with scantly clad bombshell actresses and a version of "punked" that is 10 times better. "Aló presidente!", is what you get from the state media. A talk show hosted by el loco, full of government propaganda that reminds me of Noriega's TV show called "Todo por la patria".


* You gotta love govt officials that spout lines like this:
"Mister gringo, be sure that we are going to come back to defeat you . . . because we work with the truth, we have spirit and above all something very special, a leader who unites and inspires us, the commandante Chavez!"

Another not so great sign is when the "leader" wants to make his (in his own words) re-election be indefinite.

His actual words here, with audio.

I didn't say I supported the coup, although it's ironic to mention that Chavez also tried to overthrow a "Democratically elected" government too. Having lived in Central America, I'm not scandalized by coups I guess, but of course that's not best way to affect political change.

I know a bit about the private-owned (I just love how the term is supposed to sound dirty) media in the US and that it was never particularly pro Chavez, that's why I find it funny when people in the US say their media is the most biased in the world. But the state media in Venezuela is also troubling, specially when you have the "leader" giving 5-6 (it varies) speeches in his show every Sunday with no rebuttal from the opposition. He also appears on all the state controlled TV stations. Now imagine 5-6 hour show by GW Bush full of him just spouting over and over again about how it's better to fight the terrorists in Iraq than here, and no way for the Democrats to get equal air time.

I don't think you get the full picture either. The guy is a Castro wannabe, who is already trying amend the constitution to stay in power "indefinetly" (HIS WORDS, follow the audio link).

That is true, but it's really outrageous to say that the opposition is only the "rich" in Venezuela. Just look at the size of the recent opposition march, or talk to any of the people who have escaped Venezuela to live here in the US in the past decade (many rich, many middle class, and some poor).

I used to be part of the Panamenian opposition as a young teen, and I rember the government used to say the same exact thing, that we were the "rich" opposition. Then I had to watch a local public high school (full of non-rich students) get tear gassed and abused by the local stormtroppers. Venezuela is not there I think, but I can't deny that it's looking very similar in many aspects.

A lot of the good that has been done is not permanent and a lot of it is for show. If they have an improved heatlh care system, how come the infant mortality rate has increased!?!? Or the % of people earning less than $2 a year has increased by 10%??? (*) Chavez cares more about his international appearance than the people of Venezuela.

He's also consolidated power in the presidency, and even has stacked the Supreme Court to the point were they sing his slogans in public!

We'll see how the elections go later this year, hopefully it'll be peacefull and hopefully he loses. We don't need this mess in Latin America.

The main point of that editorial is fact, he has introduced more laws that restrict freedom of expression, you can read the same at the Human Rights Watch website:

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/03/24/venezu10368.htm

“By broadening laws that punish disrespect for government authorities, the Venezuelan government has flouted international human rights principles that protect free expression,” said José Miguel Vivanco, Americas director at Human Rights Watch. “While countries across Latin America are moving to repeal such laws, Venezuela has enacted further restrictions on the press that will shield officials from public scrutiny.”

These laws are working as Venevision is focusing more on entertainment and less on news an editorials.

Sometimes, supression does work. In the meantime, there's always the weekly 6 hour and horrible "Alo presidente" show.

As I don't drink beer, I'm not against it, but in this non-issue you can still see his weird tendencies;

"As of today, I want the National Guard to stop the beer trucks and take them to the nearest command post. No more trucks," he said in a televised speech.

The National Guard! Wow.

Again, the guy could dress in military garb as president, supress freedom of the press, pretty much diminsh the power of the other branches of government, already talks about extending his presidency by changing the constitution, stack the supreme court to the point were they justices sing his slogans, have 6 hour televised speeches to the nation on 'state-tv', interfere in the elections of other countries (Mexico, Nicaragua, etc), help Marxist 'rebels' in Colombia, etc and all we get from people like juan are innocent 'geez look he's just banning beer street sales, what's the big deal'.

C'mon.

Of course, if I don't like Chavez, I must be against social justice and the poor people! Yeah that makes sense.

No I'm against "leaders" who pretend to make deep social changes but really are just about their personality, and personify "revolutions" based just in them. That's why Castro has failed, it's all about Castro and that why he had to be there the whole time. It's a wasted effort because when he's gone, the whole thing is going to crumble. He's creating people that are politically dependant of a figure, not a system that works.

Crushing the other branches of goverment is nothing to just dismiss, just like having one party in the US controll all branches of government is a good thing, no matter how we got there (either by changing constitutions or by people being dumb enough to not vote for the greater good).

ElCapitanMcCarthy

Do we really need this right now in Latin America?

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...Ce4&refer=news