MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Chile cannot be forced to negotiate a Bolivian sovereign access to the Pacific, says UN court
Landlocked Bolivia cannot force Chile to negotiate over granting it “sovereign access” to the Pacific Ocean, judges at the International Court of Justice ruled on Monday in a setback to Bolivian President Evo Morales. Bolivia surrendered most of its former coastline to Chile in a 1904 treaty following the War of the Pacific. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesWhy doesn't Argentina bring the dispute of sovereinty ( regarding the FALKLANDS ) to the ICJ, we all know why don't we?
Oct 02nd, 2018 - 04:28 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Bolivia and Evo Morales lost ?!?
Oct 02nd, 2018 - 04:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Quelle surprise ... for anybody outside Bolivia? I don't think so.
Yet another warning to Argentina: Don't ever try to get an independent judgment on your Falkland Islands claim.
Yes, but we Chileans maintain a substantial military to reinforce our resolve our border. As we declare on our escudo: “Por la razón o la fuerza”
Oct 02nd, 2018 - 06:56 pm - Link - Report abuse +1Our has our British friends say: “go and pound sand...”
““Bolivia will never allow itself to be kept from the sea,” he said. “The Bolivian people and the people of the world know that through an invasion, sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean has been taken away.”
Oct 02nd, 2018 - 07:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As long as Morales 'demands', let him stew in his own soup....instead of saying ”sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean has been taken away”, he should probably say a treaty Bolivia signed, took it away...
Why doesn't Morales ask Peru for access ? after all wasn't Peru Bolivia's unwilling partner in the war against Chile ?
The fact that sea-access figures in Bolivia's Constitution is as pointless as the Argentine Constitution mentioning the Falklands.
Reading this story and considering its half a world from where i live,me a retired pensioner in United Kingdom a small island called Isle of wight,Yes no one from Bolivia or Chile has ever heard or know where i live,but thought as an outside scource ,and have no connections to either country.But maybe some outside comments may help.First i do hope comments from me to both Bolivia and Chile.But after the President went to the UN to get proper route through to the Pacific Ocean.Yes the Bolivian President lost the case.But earlier it was stated over 5yrs communication between the 2 countries had ceased.So why is so.MAYBE its the differnt attitudes of the 2 countries ,both are what we say “HOT HEADED” Maybe tempers make talking impossible.BUT why on earth why the PRESIDENTS OF BOTH BOLIVIA AND CHILE” should get to talks ,if not in own countries,then why dont two presidents ask an outside country like Venezuala or Brazil,or again Argentina.So why not get mediation in one independent country.Then sit together and arrange in peaceful talks,yes peaceful talks ,and above all is to sign a STATEMENT OF ARRANGEMENT to have a corridor to the PACIFIC .So easy to talk and sign up to arrange a corridor to acess from Bolivia via chile to Pacific.Anyway from a pensioner in United Kingdom to Chile/Bolivia get round table and arrange corridor,EASY ,Thanks Mike Cox,.
Oct 02nd, 2018 - 08:17 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Why doesn't Morales ask Peru for access ?”
Oct 02nd, 2018 - 08:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Didn't Pinochet offer to give Bolivia a corridor to the sea in 1975, but Peru blocked the proposal? There's not much sympathy from that direction. Chile took land from Peru as well, maybe they don't want it given to Bolivia because they're still hoping to get it back someday?
@Chicureo
Globalfirepower.com ranks Peru above Chile. D'you reckon you could beat them?
@DT
Oct 02nd, 2018 - 09:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Why doesn't Morales...?” just a rhetorical question ; Peru couldn't have been too happy at being dragged into the war by Bolivia....Funny, people go to war over territory, lose it, then think they can demand it back.
Continuation of ”Bolsonaro undergoes surgery..”
You don’t have to be all that observant to notice a change in someone’s mood - what I’m saying is I am not aware of anyone I know having gone through it. Very hard to act as if nothing had happened.
For about 2 years, the holdup made me jittery when people crossed just behind or in front of my car when I was stopped. I left the scene of the robbery (car, money), straight to the police. The car was found a week later, not far from where it was robbed, pretty bashed up. People close to me knew what happened, ‘n were who brought my attention to my aggressiveness. You can’t hide that kind of stuff...unless you’re a hermit.
If the intended victim gets away, great, but it does not lessen the seriousness…should attempted murder be dealt with less harshly than murder ? Don’t think so. If the criminal, at the last moment, had a change of heart, his intent would remain unknown ; the victim getting away after a struggle should not be a mitigating factor. We only know what happens, after the fact.
Re BK, with witnesses contradicting each other, no smoking gun, the conclusions reached won’t be based on proof, but on what you want to believe. Regardless, his career is over. Thanks to Ford, who accused him w/o proof.
“I don't know how the country got so divided”…I reckon we can thank BO for most of it - he didn’t think twice about using ‘victimization’ of blacks by the police, to gain support…afaic, this was significant in resuscitating underlying resentment most blacks feel for whites. This radicalization probably contaminated Congress, making everything ‘us against them’.
And of course, there’s good ole ‘political correctness’, responsible for unnecessarily reinforcing divisiveness.
Chile has been in numerous discussions regarding our border with Bolivia for years and they have complete free access to the Pacific with a railway our country built for them. Peru has given them an actual coastal site, which remains unused.
Oct 02nd, 2018 - 10:42 pm - Link - Report abuse +2Right or wrong, Chile won a territorial war that resulted in the humiliation of Peru and Bolivia and they still resent it. Morales is a disaster for his country.
As far as our military vs. theirs, we would easily devastate them although I have very high respect for the Peruvian navy and their officer corps. Their airforce and army are weak, poorly equipped and ill trained.
Regarding Brazil... They hopefully will abandon the PT and embrace Bolsonaro.
The fight over judge Kavanaugh is about the US Supreme Court becoming conservative. It's purely political.
@JB
Oct 02nd, 2018 - 11:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What actually happened to you, was it a car-jacking? After a traumatic event it must be very hard to act as though nothing happened, but even if people see a change, they won't necessarily know why. All these cases of child sex abuse that have come out recently, like the Jimmy Savile ones, show it must be possible to hide it. Some of the victims told people - or tried to - but many did not. And if children can keep it a secret then adults can too.
“should attempted murder be dealt with less harshly than murder ? Don’t think so.”
It often is, though. The same should apply to attempted rape, but that would probably be prosecuted as sexual assault, if it was prosecuted at all. It would be even harder to prove (or disprove) than rape, and that's already very hard, especially when the attacker is some seemingly respectable man rather than a criminal from the wrong side of town.
Trump doesn't think BK's career is over. But he's not on trial in a real court, but in the court of public opinion, where innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply (and so is Ford; plenty of Republicans are calling her a liar, equally without proof). Do you believe the women who accused Bill Clinton, or do you also think they were lying or mistaken?
“I reckon we can thank BO for most of it”
It definitely began before Obama, I remember people talking about it during Bush's presidency. There was a lot of resentment among Democrats for - as they saw it - Bush stealing the Presidency. Maybe it goes back even further, to Clinton's impeachment, or the founding of Fox news. It got a lot worse after Obama was elected though. Before he even did anything, all the crazies came out of the woodwork claiming he was basically the anti-Christ, and spreading absurd rumours. The whole BLM thing was just the icing on the divisiveness cake.
@Chicureo
I don't care if Brazil abandon the PT, but I sure hope they don't embrace Bolsonaro. And the fight over BK *is* political, but not purely political.
@DT
Oct 03rd, 2018 - 05:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Was stopped at a traffic-light, a guy appeared from behind ‘n through the open window, put a gun to my head. Only someone who doesn’t know you, won’t notice change. I don’t doubt a child victimized by sex abuse will try to hide it, but don’t believe it’ll pass unperceived in their behavior.
Right, the fact an attempted crime may not come to fruition, should not be regarded less seriously than if it had….obviously, if the would-be perpetrator gives up in the planning stage, ‘n is not discovered, there’s no prosecutable crime.
Re BK, even IF the hearings are decided in his favor, ‘n Trump appoints him to the bench, he’ll always have live with the cloud of doubt lingering over his head. It can either destroy yr self-esteem or make you bloody angry.
Given Bill’s several admissions regarding Lewinsky (one, admitting he stuck a cigar in her vagina, but not to sexual intercourse), she told her colleague, his sperm on her dress, evidence is clear.
The fact Hillary, at the time tried to force some of the other women to keep quiet through veiled threats, then tried to discredit them publicly ‘n to ruin their reputations, speaks for itself.
Perhaps the divisiveness was already in the pipeline before BO, but he was the only US president I have seen that publicly took sides (black x white) without knowing all the facts…and when the truth came out – slightly “different” to the accusations, kept quiet. Remember Trayvon Martin ? “he could be a son of mine, bla-bla, bla”.
Even if the Bushes did wangle the Florida votes to his benefit, don’t see the link between that 'n the need to foment hostility between social classes ‘n races. Even though he was 50/50 black/white, he made a point of declaring himself black…why reinforce it ? why not just be a ‘person’ ? the same as his reluctance to associate terrorism with Islam…that’s what I call ‘denial’.
The BLM became political (funded initially or later on - don’t know - by Soros), was indeed the icing on the cake.
@JB
Oct 03rd, 2018 - 09:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You don't think you could have hidden it if you really had to, or made up some excuse? But everyone is different. There definitely have been cases where the victim hid it for many years, and if people close to them noticed changes in their behaviour, they didn't know the reason.
I'm not convinced an attempted crime should always be treated the same as a successful one, but if that's so it means BK should be punished as a rapist if he's guilty. In that case, the cloud of suspicion is a pretty light punishment, considering he gets to keep his freedom and career.
RE Clinton, sure the evidence for the Lewinsky case is clear, but she made it pretty clear she wanted to, even if she was young and star-struck at the time. I meant the other, more serious allegations, like Juanita Broaddrick's.
I thought by divisiveness you meant between Democrats and Republicans, or liberals and whatever Trump's supporters are (can't call them conservative when they elected him specifically to change everything). Not black vs white. I dunno what previous presidents have said, but at least Obama never proclaimed that he trusted the leader of a hostile nation more than his own people.
“Even if the Bushes did wangle the Florida votes to his benefit, don’t see the link between that 'n the need to foment hostility between social classes ‘n races.”
I don't think there is one, but surely you can see the link to one side not trusting the other to have a sense of honour or respect for democracy?
“Even though he was 50/50 black/white, he made a point of declaring himself black”
AFAIK it's an American thing. This is the country that had the one-drop rule, you don't get to choose your race, and if you're not 100% white, you're black. In America black and white people lived separately for 100 years and ended up with different, parallel cultures with their own accents, sports, etc, so it means more than just race. D'you think having British heritage means something, or are you just a person?
Hey Mikey
Oct 03rd, 2018 - 11:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Are you sure you are in United Kingdom...?
...and if that makes perfect sense to you...then you are not...
DT
Oct 04th, 2018 - 05:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The fact I’d make excuses to hide something, in itself would stand out like a sore thumb. Trying to hide it, 'n being successful at it, to the point of no one suspecting anything, are two different things.
Who said BK “intended” to rape Ford ? so much so, IF he intended to, he didn’t manage. If proved it was his MO, (despite his drunkenness) to take girls by force and rape them, then yes, he should be tried as a rapist. As he is not being prosecuted - in which case Ford would have to prove her allegations - the cloud of suspicion will always be there, regardless of whether he is confirmed to the SC or not.
In Clinton’s case, other than Lewinsky - which shows a pretty clear pattern of behavior - the fact other women came forward (1 allegedly raped, 3 sexually harassed, 4 claiming consensual sex), imo, just confirms his inaBILLity to control himself. His supporters like to brush it aside as ‘infidelity’ or, admit to a lesser crime to get away with a more serious one.
In the US, divisiveness may have begun totally unperceived through reactions to specific events, which eventually multiplied and gradually became conscious resentment, contaminating society ‘n turning many things in to ‘us v. them’ issues. If it were a sentiment easily traceable to a specific event, it might be easier to neutralize it, but today, nearly everything has become polarized, creating a natural distrust of the other side and making it hard to establish common ground.
Agree that the ‘one-drop rule’ is almost unavoidable, and I believe one’s heritage (usually) contributes to molding your views, but what I’m saying about BO, is that he, as president, should have been above publicly making that distinction, which only reinforced any hostility between blacks 'n whites. Did previous presidents emphasize their race as a tool to bring sympathizers to their side ?
Instead of reinforcing racial differences, why not admit they exist, accept them, and not use them as a means to divide ?
@JB
Oct 04th, 2018 - 06:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Looks like BK is likely to be confirmed. Bad news for Americans who care about their rights, but it also affects the credibility of the supreme court itself. Most people think the country will survive, but things are going from bad to worse.
“In the US, divisiveness may have begun totally unperceived through reactions to specific events”
Maybe, but they keep taking it one step further and making things worse. Eg, from the Dem's point of view, the Pubs were refusing to work with them and unreasonably blocking all Obama's nominees, so in frustration they ended the filibuster for most positions. And from the Pub's point of view, the Dem's removed a safeguard so they could get their own way rather than have to work with the opposition. So now there are less safeguards and they are both even more reluctant to cooperate.
And I think the divisions among ordinary people are stoked by them getting their news from different sources. The fake news on Facebook is the most extreme example, but even real news programs can disagree radically these days.
As for Obama, IMO he stressed the fact he was black and part of the black community because he wanted to get more black people out to vote for him. And I don't believe it was just a cynical ploy, because alongside his more general policies like healthcare, he did try to tackle the problems that disproportionately affect black people in America, ones he probably felt had been ignored for far too long. Whether he was successful or ended up making things worse is a whole different question.
@DT
Oct 04th, 2018 - 07:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Haven't being following CNN, where I watched the hearings last week. I'm sure that those who think the country's going from bad to worse, are the democrats.
Re divisiveness, I agree , every decision is an excuse to take it one step further. At some point both parties will have to sit down and start to work together. It looks like everything they do is tit-for-tat.
Quite bit of news I see on FB is fake. When it sounds off, it usually is. Even reputable sources need double-checking every now and again. Less chance for fake news, but mistakes and/or bias are possible.
May not have been a “cynical” ploy, and don't recall BO using the colour of his skin to get elected, although it probably was factor many voters took into consideration ; later on he emphasized it (even if involutarily,) indirectly through his actions (rushing to condemn white on black crime, in order to gain support). That is what I didn't like. He conveniently ignored the fact that about 90% of all black deaths by murder, were committed by other blacks. And most probably the highest rates occurred in cities like Chicago and Detroit, where the democrats had been in power since the 70s.
I'm not a Democrat, and I think it is. I would never have believed Americans would elect someone like Trump if I hadn't seen it, the stories about him read like an Onion article.
Oct 04th, 2018 - 10:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“At some point both parties will have to sit down and start to work together.”
Or have another civil war. I don't think they can ever agree now, and it makes me pretty pessimistic about America's future as a free and democratic nation (pun not intended).
I don't really use Facebook, which is probably why I'm out of the loop on fake news. It amazes me what bullshit people will swallow as long it says what they want to believe. Even ignoring politics, the internet is full of nutty conspiracy theories, and the more implausible the more the true believers cling to them.
As I understand it, BO weren't condemning white on black crime as such, but the fact (as he perceived it) that they were more likely to get away with it/get a lighter punishment than the reverse. But he should have waited to get all the facts.
@DT
Oct 05th, 2018 - 07:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Trump's voters were the traditionally silent majority, who finally decided to say 'enough' to the left. And Hillary certainly contributed to their cause.
I still believe that the situation will become so untenable that they will realize they have no option, other than forget silly party politics and do what's right...but unfortunately, might need to reach the edge of the precipice for them to come to their senses.
I use FB only as a means to locate, or communicate with, a few friends, and do not post personal information on it. Only joined because I thought it could be useful, and don't use it anywhere near the majority do.
White on Black crime, (and here, including Hispanics as white) is less than 10%....therefore I'd say Blacks have more to fear from their own than from Whites.
BO was not appreciated my many due to the fact he was a black, although he apparently took it in his stride...but what he failed to realize was that his insistence on defending blacks victimized by whites (a very small portion compared to blacks victimized by blacks), and praising Black advancement - as if the whites didn't exist - caused resentment.
“Trump's voters were the traditionally silent majority”
Oct 05th, 2018 - 11:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0They weren't a majority and they're not silent. But the 'silent majority' is a myth anyway. There's just a bunch of people, all with different views. Hang out in one place, and you'll think certain ideas are in the majority, then go to another and it's just the opposite.
If you want to know what I'm afraid of from the right, it's something like Russia, where the government is corrupt and getting more repressive all the time, Putin has been in power without a break since 1999, and his enemies 'mysteriously' turn up dead. Trump and Farage have made no secret of their admiration for Putin, despite the fact he's tried to undermine the countries they are supposedly loyal to. How anyone can trust Trump for a second is a mystery to me.
Re Obama, I saw liberals angry with him for trying too hard to cooperate with the Republicans, eg adopting ideas originally proposed by Rs as the basis for Obamacare in the hope of getting bipartisan support. Since the R's always refused to work with him, they thought Obama should give up and do what he could without them. Not saying it's the truth, but that was their impression. So what did your Republican friends think during Obama's presidency? Did they want the R's to refuse to work with the President and try to obstruct everything? Or was that not how they saw it at all?
“Blacks have more to fear from their own”
Blacks have more to fear full stop. In America they are much more likely to be the victim of a crime, and it's unlikely to be solved, either. It's a vicious circle because the people don't trust the police, believe they'll do nothing, witnesses won't talk to them, and because of that they are not able to do much. The police need to increase trust somehow, and prove that they can and will protect witnesses from criminals.
“praising Black advancement - as if the whites didn't exist - caused resentment.”
Can you explain to me why that causes resentment, please?
DT
Oct 07th, 2018 - 12:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0Before the campaign started they were...Trump, AND the left, woke them up. The fact that you call them a 'bunch of people with different views', does not describe them properly..IMO. They were sufficiently similar in their views to unite against the left.
You're afraid of Russia ? and you think 'they' are 'right' ? well, that's one hell of a swing from communism. They are just as left as before - everything State controlled, one party, with a relatively significant increase in personal freedom, although controlled to avoid what they consider 'excesses'...basically still an authoritarian State.
Talk about turning up dead...In 2002, Celso Daniel (PT Mayor of Sto Andre 'n likely to be Minister in Lula’s presidency in 2003) was assassinated under 'very' mysterious circumstances...obviously political because he was about to blow the lid off a corruption scheme involving garbage collection 'n public transport…confirmed by his brother who was later threatened 'n forced to leave the country with his family. Toninho do PT (PT mayor of Campinas, SP), also assassinated in 2001, to keep his mouth shut. The four suspects were killed by the police. Gilberto Morgado, another PT mayor, assassinated in (2006 ?), in order to cover up a corruption scheme involving garbage collection in Monte Alto…and then 7 witnesses of some of these crimes, also assassinated. All just mere coincidence. Of course.
My Republican friends did not like BO. The Republicans only had the power to obstruct him in the lower house after the mid-term elections...before that, BO had a relatively free hand.
“Blacks have more to fear full stop”...perhaps, but still more from other blacks than whites. Considering that more blacks than whites, percentage wise, get caught up in crime, it's not surprising. Not trusting the police is not a cause of black deaths.
”“praising Black advancement.....etc... caused resentment.” - not the advancement in it self (which is good), but the way in which BO presented it.
@JB
Oct 07th, 2018 - 01:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You think Putin is left-wing?! But in any case, it's the authoritarians I'm afraid of, the people who want to limit freedom and enforce conformity with their backwards ideas, and are happy to imprison or murder anyone who gets in their way. Communism was just another face of the same beast. That's why I hate Trump and Farage, and Bolsonaro, too.
Perhaps there is a 'silent majority' in the US: the over 40% who don't vote. But if so they are still silent; turnout in 2016 was even lower than in 2012. Presumably they are united only by their apathy, and they are not a majority either.
So who are you talking about? You think R voters are more silent than D voters, in general? That's certainly not my perception (see below re Obama). Or you think it's ordinary people of both parties whose views are not well represented by the politicians they elect? Trump certainly was different to the other R candidates, and nearly the whole party was united against him in the primaries.
I wouldn't expect your R friends to like any Dem, but why did they object to Obama in particular? That's what I never understood, to me he didn't seem much different to (Bill) Clinton, or the other possible Dem candidates, but Republicans acted like the world was ending, and spread absurd rumours about him.
And how can advancement be a cause for resentment, unless due to jealousy?
“Not trusting the police is not a cause of black deaths.”
But trusting the police could reduce them, because they'd have more chance of catching the criminals and putting them in jail, instead of ending up leaving murderers on the streets to kill again.
Those 3 mayors who were assassinated, you believe it was done by their own party to keep them quiet? Why not by their opponents, or other people involved in the corruption schemes? If the PT were going to assassinate anyone, wouldn't it make more sense to bump off their rivals, or even Moro?
Putin is authoritarian, a communist...hardly right-wing. Ok, after the Brazilian military, who left voluntarily in 1985, who else has been authoritarian, other than the PT clearly signalling their objective ? think of the Foro de SP, Hugo Chaves, Maduro, Castros....the PT is not a political party, it's a fanatical cult that will stop at nothing to get what it wants...I know you don't get the FULL story in the UK, 'n what you do probably has a leftist slant to it, but believe me, I think I'd be more afraid of the PT in power again, that Putin....Putin is becoming less intolerant, while the PT is striving to become like the USSR used to....believe me, no exaggeration.
Oct 07th, 2018 - 10:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Look, I don't know the exact figures, nor am I concerned with them, but the fact remains that many US voters who were content to go with flow, got fed up with the left....that's what made the 2016 election change direction.
My friends were against Obamacare, mainly....and did not like BO's approach to racial matters, to terrorism (downplaying Islam's responsibility etc....) . It's a whole lot of small things that go adding up, which, if you stop to think about, they piss you off. As I was not there on a day-to-day basis , so I don't know all the details of things that did not make int'l news, but I'm sure could tell you more if I lived there.
Don't think jealousy had anything to do with it....but BO's insistent speech about how wonderful the blacks were, as if the whites had nothing to do with America's greatness....Afaic, BO gave the impression (and probably more than just an impression to Americans) that he 'n the blacks alone, were what mattered. Have you ever been to there? travelled around, spoken to people from the various regions, to get a feeling of their political likes/dislikes ?
Well, if trust is a key factor, the blacks better start trusting the police, instead of confronting them.
3 mayors : W/O a doubt. “Opponents” would love the scandal. That was 16,10 yrs ago - Not so easy today.
@JB
Oct 08th, 2018 - 09:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You wouldn't have voted for B in the first round if you really disliked him. I defended you and now you've made me look like a fool.
I should have remembered your views are not so different to his; I let myself forget what you really believe because I liked you, and that was stupid.
“it's a fanatical cult that will stop at nothing to get what it wants”
Don't be daft. You *know* how bad things can get, you saw people resort to violence in the 70s (including Dilma), and nothing of the sort has happened now. If they were truly willing to stop at nothing, Lula wouldn't be in jail today, he'd be President.
And Putin's not a communist, he's a right-wing nationalist.
@DT
Oct 08th, 2018 - 11:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Bolsonaro was not my preferred candidate two weeks ago. Alckmin was first choice, as he has traditionally presented himself as an option against the PT. I also considered Amoedo, given he is business-friendly, and a newcomer, not a politician. Then when it started to become clear Alckmin would not make the runoff - he stagnated around 6 or 7% - and then he said he would support Haddad, afaic that cooked his goose. Amoedo was next in line, but with 3% of the vote, he was going nowhere. It became a matter of choosing from narrowing options, and only a couple of weeks ago, did Bolsonaro look more 'n more like the one to get rid of the PT. Sorry if you feel fooled, not my intention...why the hell would I try to fool you ? I've explained how the sequence of events went changing my mind, and knowing how I hate the PT, plus yr following the presidential polls, you could've seen it coming...and, it was only after the attack that Bolsonaro started to grow, and the others, to stay put.
Your opinion that i'm daft because I think the PT is a fanatical cult, reflects the fact you do not know them as well as I do...Hoffman, Dirceu, Lindbergh Faria, Graziotin, Humberto Costa, Fatima Bezerra, to name a few, are as radical as hell ; and since 1985, until 7 or 8 years ago, I've never seen so much class hatred, as spread by the PT.
From where you are, you can't see how the social fabric has deteriorated. It didn't need to become like the 70s (and even then, was different) to realize that the sh*t was hitting the fan.
The PT went pushing all social and decency boundaries just to see how far they could get, short of calling on Stedile to create havoc in the cities and the rural areas...which they threatened, on more than one occasion.....as they knew, crossing the mark would probably make the military react.
How much really nasty political and social unrest have you been through ?
Right , re Putin have it yr way. As I said, you are too 'trusting'.
Okay, you weren't trying to fool me, I fooled myself because I wanted to believe your views weren't really so bad.
Oct 09th, 2018 - 11:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0You didn't consider that if Alckmin was telling his voters to switch to Haddad, it was because he believed B would be *even worse*?
I think you sound silly saying the PT are a fanatical cult because I'm looking at the results - in Venezuela leaders of the opposition are in jail, in Brazil, Lula is in jail. In Vz when congress opposed the president, it was sidelined, in Br the president was impeached. In Vz there have been violent demonstrations and many have died, and even military attacks from the opposition like the helicopter shooting at government buildings. In Br they talked about getting the MST on the streets but didn't do it. Not only have the PT not managed to stay in power, there are many options - for example violence or threats against specific individuals - they haven't even tried, so it's obvious they *do* have limits.
“The PT went pushing all social and decency boundaries”
What does that even mean?
RE Putin, it's not a matter of opinion. Does he espouse communist ideology? No, he talks about family and patriotism. And in practice, does he follow communist ideas like no private ownership, collective farms and a command economy? No. He favours some state intervention, but Russia's economy is based on market principles now.
And there's something else I was thinking about. I ask you questions because I want to understand your views and why you hold them, but you don't ask me about mine. You prefer to dismiss my ideas because I've had different experiences. Sure I've never lived in a 3rd world country and visiting one isn't the same, but you might find some ideas worth emulating in a nation that generally does function okay. Besides that, we are equally able to look at history, and third countries, to see what works in practice and what doesn't. But there's not much point me talking to you if you're just going to dismiss what I say.
Not surprised you hate Trump, F & Bolsonaro - don’t need to read btwn the lines to see you prefer the left. You’ve misunderstood what I’ve been saying (re election), but Alckmin’s traitorous attitude, to support the PT, pissed me off.
Oct 09th, 2018 - 08:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yr Q, a few posts back, “the 3 mayors assassinated, believe it was the PT ? Why not by opponents/others involved in corruption ? If PT assassinated anyone, wouldn't it make more sense….even Moro?”. Couldn’t reply satisfactorily : of course it was the PT…to prevent them from spilling the beans. The local police/ PT govts were very sloppy abt investigating 'n soon all was forgotten. As to murdering Moro, wouldn’t that be a bit obvious ?
I used to get the impression you were legitimately interested in learning more abt Bzln politics, but lately, with questions like the above, and others apparently aimed at finding excuses to downplay the PT’s evil streak, their participation in corruption, ‘n your apparent reluctance to accept the fact Foro de SP is their ultimate dream - I feel I've been wasting my time. Sorry for saying so, but you haven’t a clue about how fanatical the PT is, 'n brainwashed their followers are. By the look of it, no amount of information will change that.
I have no agenda, nor do I have any interest in changing yr views (molded by yr growing up in the UK, a relatively stable ‘n turbulent-free political environment) - but just to open yr eyes. You seem to be an intelligent, well-educated guy, but I'm starting to think you believe I'm either exaggerating, or lying.
Re Putin, what do you know of the USSR ? other than the watered-down, romantic version you hear of it today ? Communism in the USSR was brutal ; after ending in 1989, Russia has changed, ‘n Putin has adapted himself well to the new reality - but a leopard can’t lose its spots.
I’ve never “dismissed” your ideas (?) - Bzl is miles behind the UK 'n cannot be measured by UK standards. But if you think there's no point talking to me, it's up to you.
TBH, yes I do think you're exaggerating about the PT. You hate them and everything they stand for, you're about as impartial as liberals discussing Trump. You just called Alckmin traitorous for preferring them to a guy who has literally said he wants to overthrow the government! (And you can't say Alckmin is a bleeding heart liberal or doesn't understand Brazil.) I don't think you're lying, but you're right that no amount of you claiming they are fanatical will change my opinion. Reading the declarations of the FdSP did, though. I'm not going to believe you over what I see with my own eyes; only evidence would change my mind.
Oct 09th, 2018 - 10:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“but just to open yr eyes”
I wasn't trying to open your eyes or change your mind (well, maybe a little), but I hoped you could at least understand why liberals believe what we do, why people supported Obama, BLM, etc. In other words, I hoped the learning would be a two-way street. I spent enough time on the internet seeing liberals saying conservatives were crazy, stupid or evil, and I know conservatives say the same thing about liberals. Everyone is getting a very one-sided view, and I wanted to see if I could change that, for me but also for you. So, are you also interested in learning and understanding the other 'side' better?
Sure, Brazil is very different to the UK, but not in every way. Laws of economics are the same everywhere, no? If you want to know whether some policy is a good idea, it would be wise to look at other countries where they have tried it, see how successful or otherwise it was, and what the similarities and differences are.
“what do you know of the USSR ?”
I don't know if it was watered down, but I don't think there was anything romantic about the Holodomor, or Stalin's purges, sending people to the gulag, or the oppression and queues and shortages that afflicted ordinary people. What was your point?
DT
Oct 09th, 2018 - 11:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“TBH, yes I do think you're exaggerating about the PT.”...okay, you are entitled to yr opinion and me, to mine, plus the fact that I have accompanying them for 33 years. Your right, I do hate them, because I know who they are and what they want for Brazil. You don't and even if you did, it wouldn't affect you.
Sure Alckmin knows Brazil, but he has always presented himself as a fierce anti-'petista', so imagine my surprise /disappointment when he said he'd stand by Haddad /Lula. Might be good for him (politically), not for me. Sorry, did not ustand : you read about the F de SP's mission, yet you aren't convinced of the PT's intentions ?
DT, you “liberals”, in the UK (or even in the US), are a totally different cup of tea to what liberals are here...here they are populists who use flowery words to fool the masses.They put their trust in Lula/Dilma, what did they reap ? one big crisis....but you probably think that's bs.
I am a 'libertarian” (as used in the US)..in favor of personal freedom, small government , a free-market etc....While I have no problem with the preferences of 'minorities' - after all, it's 'their' biz - I do not like it when they try to impose their beliefs on everyone else...Live and let live, is my motto. I know what the other 'side' likes, I wasn't born yesterday, but for me, I prefer to stick to my own beliefs...which I do NOT try to push down their throats.
Brazil and the UK are sufficiently different in what matters....to start with the fact you've always had relatively honest governments, accountable to the people...If you could see some of our candidates for State legislatures, for Congress, you'd have a shock. When will you accept the fact that govt is only as good as the people who elect them ?
My point with the USSR, is that today people think it wasn't ALL that bad....just like Cuba...like VZ...in a few years, say 30 ?, after these stinkin' dictators have all been kicked out, people will say, ”ah VZ under Maduro was ok....
So you feel betrayed by Alckmin? He's a politician, and demonising the opposition is a good way to get votes, but maybe he never really believed what he was saying? Even so, disagreeing on who is the worst of two bad candidates doesn't make him a traitor. What reasons did he give for supporting Haddad?
Oct 10th, 2018 - 06:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Re the FdSP, sure, they haven't changed their basic aims. But though they still support Maduro, I don't believe anyone could look at Vz now and see a model to emulate. Anyway, it doesn't make them a fanatical cult, and I'm just not seeing any signs of ruthlessness in achieving those goals
“Brazil and the UK are sufficiently different in what matters”
We were talking about the US, earlier. What do you reckon, is it more like the UK, more like Brazil, or somewhere in between? If people and countries are so different, wouldn't it make sense to support different policies in the US compared to Brazil?
As for liberals, do you know anyone personally in Brazil who identifies as left-wing? Do you have any friends in America who support the Democrats? If not then how do you know what sort of people they are, or what they believe?
“I do not like it when they try to impose their beliefs on everyone else”
Like their belief they should have the same rights as the majority and be able to get on with their lives without being discriminated against? You never did tell me what you meant by the PT “pushing all social and decency boundaries”.
“My point with the USSR, is that today people think it wasn't ALL that bad”
Do they? I learned about it in school, but I haven't seen it mentioned much since then either way. Russia is, of course, and not in a positive sense. But why does that make Putin a communist? AFAIK he does want to rebuild Russia's empire, but not as a communist state.
“”ah VZ under Maduro was ok”
Nah, they'll say “Vz under Chavez was okay, it was Maduro who ruined things.” And Cuba is still a dictatorship now, I can only think Latinos admire it for defying America.
You could say that. But pls stop trying to excuse Alckmin; I supported him for 20 yrs ; always declared himself a staunch anti-petista - in Aug 2015, actually met up with him…we discussed Lula ‘n the shit he is. So yes, I believed him. Faced with the options, even his VP went against him. Alckmin’s given no justifiable reason that I know of, other than looking like when he realized Haddad might win, he decided to support him, trying to guarantee his political future. It backfired, and exposed his weakness.
Oct 10th, 2018 - 08:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Good to know you don’t think VZ is a model to emulate, but the Foro de SP thinks it is. It meets every year ; Lula last participated 2014 I think, before he was accused. Fanatical, perhaps not the right word – “extreme” is. How it intends to reach its goals is bad enough, but the actual goals are worse, incompatible w/ democracy. Watch Lula’s message to Hugo Chavez, in 2012 : https://youtu.be/tD4mfCnugXo
The US, being part of the ‘new world’, has many similarities to Brazil, but its people, as a whole (different background) have experienced democracy ‘n prefer it. For a country to really get ahead, it’s got to be serious, it’s population hard working 'n get rid of political turmoil.
“know anyone personally in BZL who is left-wing?” yes, but we avoid politics; I know some American Democrats, know their feelings but wouldn’t call them friends.
The PT’s absurd insistence that they, 'n they alone are victimized, when most normal people would back down, is what I mean.
“Like their belief they should have same rights“ ? yes, the SAME rights.
You learned abt the USSR in school…probably fm 'pink' teachers…I actually learned from reality, and the threat it posed. D’you think Putin stopped being a communist because Russia opened up slightly ?
IMO, Maduro just carried on Hugo’s ‘good’ work…it would’ve been just a matter of time if he hadn’t died.
”..think Latinos admire it for defying America”...if so, pretty silly. But where is it Latinos all try to get in to ?
If that was Alckmin's reason he was pretty foolish not to wait until after the first round; Haddad never even got ahead of B in the polls. Did he give *any* reasons for his decision? I'd like to know even if it's bullshit. And how do you get to meet up with a major politician, anyway?
Oct 10th, 2018 - 11:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I watched your video, and Lula boasts about achieving economic growth, job creation, distribution of wealth, and social inclusion. Perfectly good goals. And then he says they need to fight for democracy in their region, which is all very laudable. But he doesn't mention Cuba, a completely undemocratic dictatorship that they support just because it's left-wing. For me that undermines all the FdSP's rhetoric, because they only care about democracy when it works in their favour, and it's the same with Vz.
But I daresay they view it like you: democracy is important, but it's more important to keep the wrong people out of power, and if opposition politicians and protesters are in jail they probably did something to deserve it.
I wouldn't say the US is more similar to Brazil, though it is pretty different from Europe in some ways. But I was really wondering if you think there are laws/policies that would work in one but not the other. To give an example from my end, I'm happy that guns are banned here, but I don't think that would work in the US for many reasons.
“yes, but we avoid politics”
Do you think they are 'champagne socialists', then? And do you also avoid discussing politics with the Democrats you know?
“yes, the SAME rights.”
Like the right to keep a job, be served in a shop and get married? But I still don't know what you mean about the PT, can you give an example?
“I actually learned from reality, and the threat it posed.”
JB, growing up there were several American airbases close to me, and I watched them pack up and leave because the Cold War was over. Nowadays it's RAF planes screaming overhead, to intercept the Russians testing our defences.
Out of room again...
2/3 weeks b4 the election, when Lula finally named Haddad his successor, he grew significantly, reducing the difference to Bolsonaro ; Probably Alckmin thought he’d overtake B, 'n decided it’d be convenient to change boats. Alckmin simply communicated his decision…after it backfired, ‘n Bolsonaro nearly won in the 1st round, he said the PSDB would remain neutral, as “neither extreme was the solution” (?). Met Alckmin several times, years ago, at cultural events that my wife was involved in…in Aug 2015, met him again at the wedding of my wife’s nephew, whose father in law is a prominent politician in Piauí, and strong anti-petista.
Oct 11th, 2018 - 05:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Lula’s goals ‘n boasting “sound” wonderful, but he did not deliver…come to Brazil, take a look for yourself. Just fyi, Haddad only won in the NE, where the BF is concentrated...mean anything to you ? Over the last 20 years, do you know who Lula’s best ‘friends’ are ? Castros, Chavez, Maduro, Morales, Mojica, Teodoro Obiang (dictator of Equatorial Guinea) etc...you don’t see the pattern, do you ? It’s what I’ve always said – it’s democracy as long as it works for “them”.
“if opposition politicians /protesters are in jail they probably ‘deserve’ it”…Really ? for disagreeing publicly with Maduro ? Good reason.
I live in Brazil have been to the US 47 times (totalling abt 40 months)…believe me, similarities btwn Bzl ‘n US, far greater than Brazil ‘n UK .
Champagne socialists ? no not them, because they aren’t rich nor have anything to gain by it.
It’s pointless to discuss football, or politics with people whose views are totally different to yours…they never agree, as I’ve discovered with you.
“right to keep a job, be served in a shop and get married? Yes ! They don’t need to think like me, just don’t impose their likes/dislikes on me. PT, again ? ok, one example : Lula’s 90 odd appeals, all identical, in 3 months…just to keep him in the limelight 'n to be difficult. Is that ‘normal’ ?
Re US bases, CW over (89) etc, what's yr pt ?
Re Alckmin, I guess you weren't cynical enough about the politicians after all. Do you reckon he was lying about hating the PT all that time?
Oct 11th, 2018 - 08:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Really ? for disagreeing publicly with Maduro ?”
They don't think that is the reason, any more than you believe Lula is in jail to stop him running for President. When I spoke to Think about it, he said Leopoldo Lopez deserved to be in jail for inciting violence, and that he was one of the elite who are hand-in-glove with the US (who of course are just after the oil).
But I think the PT and left in general are very foolish not to disavow Maduro, whether they sympathise with him or not. He's the best argument against electing them, and makes them look hypocritical to boot.
“it’s democracy as long as it works for “them””
Does anyone in Brazil feel differently?
“similarities btwn Bzl ‘n US, far greater than Brazil ‘n UK”
I don't doubt that, but it wasn't the question. You keep telling me Brazil is not like the UK and what works here would not work there. But there are still big differences between Brazil and the USA, eg corruption. So the same thing should apply, no? You can't just import US policies to Brazil and expect everything to work fine.
“Champagne socialists ? no not them... they never agree”
So why on earth did you think I would agree with you if I lived in Brazil? As for visiting, my partner thinks Brazil is too dangerous, but we're going to Buenos Aires at the end of Nov. Maybe you can give me some advice.
“just don’t impose their likes/dislikes on me.”
Who imposed what on you?
Re Lula, it may not be normal, but I don't see why it's indecent or antisocial.
”US bases, CW over (89) etc, what's yr pt ?”
That you weren't under much threat in Brazil, but we were and I'm sure my parents knew it. And the CW wasn't just something I learned about in school, I saw it end and I saw how happy and optimistic people were - makes it more real, I guess.
Run out of room to talk about Putin again...
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!