Chavez/Ahmedinijad are right on one thing despite their domestic policies

[EarthNeedsHope]

Many people here have been attacking these two leaders. I say good! I think all leaders should be attacked, so they can continue to bend to the will of a populace that demands positive change in the world.

However many have been for a while insulting members of DU who support these leaders in ANY WAY. The whole "they are dictators/fascists/fanatics" memo comes about at that time.

Let's make something clear on elementary ethics, I guess:

You don't have to support what Chavez and Ahmedinijad do in all aspects.

But does that mean you can't support them defending their countries' sovereign rights?

Nations have rights. Bush is constantly trying to encroach against Iran and Venezuela, breaking the law, and asking for war.

Ahmedinijad and Chavez do not want war. They want to protect their countries. Agree or disagree with what policies and stances they take on their domestic government, but don't you agree they have a right to defend their country and stand up to Bush? Can't you at least see some sense in them doing that? Because that is their right by law, and I think a moral right any people would demand (I despise Bush but DO want him to protect our country).

So how about that?

[eleny]

1. Thank you

K&R

[1932]

2. Read Richard Gott's book on Chavez and Aleida Guevara's book on Chavez

and you'll have some insight into why some DU'ers are very enthusiastic about the government in Venezuela.

For example, in Guevara's book, there's an epilogue where she interviewed the president of the equivalent of the house of representatives. She told this story about Chavez:

She was an indigenous indian woman from out in the countryside. She was from a small town near the army base that Chavez was sent to by the army because, when he was in Caracas, he was building up a fan base made up of students of his at the army college who were being converted to his progressive politics.

In this town, white european hunters made a sport of killing the locals. One day, Chavez drove his jeep into this town and all the locals hid, because their experience with the army before that was not very positive. But the kids didn't know enough to hide, so Chavez went up to them and talked. After a while, the adults realized that he wasn't a danger. They came out and talked. He asked them about their problems. They said that they had one big problem: they were hunted for sport by white Europeans.

Chavez put a stop to that. After he solved that problem he got his unit to engage in a public works programs. He helped the town build infrastructure, schools, an oral history program and a community theater (think FDR and the Depression). Well, they loved Chavez.

He obviously did so much for that community that one of its residents was able to become the equivalent of the speaker of the house. (Wouldn't it be nice if, in the US, instead of getting assholes like Newt Gingrich, we got politicians with experiences like this woman's in Venezuela where they're insipred by people who actually try to help people in need?)

This is one of hundreds of stories about Chavez that are told in that book that are incredible insights into what motivates him and what his character is.

[EarthNeedsHope]

3. I saw a bit of "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" and Palast's report

That gave me a really positive look on Chavez. I know a lot of venezuelans in the states do not like him. But they are very upper middle class; not a fair look at all.

[1932]

6. Yes. That documentary is powerful.

[knowbody0]

4. Welcome to DU

Wise words...

[Webster Green]

5. Indeed!...

I give Chavez the benefit of the doubt when I hear about excesses, because I know he is battling with black-ops fuckers from BushCo Inc. who are trying to undermine democracy in Venezuela.

Edited to add: Welcome to DU!:hi:

[rman]

7. good point. nt

[radwriter0555]

8. You're right. Iran is correct, Venezuela is correct. Want to know who else

is correct?

Al Queda.
Bin Laden.
Hamas.
Hezbollah.

All of those entities arose from the ashes that the US oil and profiteering interests showered on their nations.

I don't agree with or condone their actions, but I completely understand those actions towards the US and US and other western interests.

I've being doing a lot of reading into the Middle East conflict going back to 1953, and it all pivots around the US (and western) desire to invade and conquer and exploit the various natural resources and related geopolitical opportunities in that region.

I don't blame them for what they do in retaliation for the horrors we've brought to their nations.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

9. Sometimes Americans act like the Japanese historical revisionists, who

talk as if the world just suddenly decided to gang up on Japan for no reason in the 1940s.

[radwriter0555]

10. SOMETIMES? 99.9999999% of americans have NO idea WHY all those groups

have risen up.

They are intent on believing that Al queda, Hamas, Hezbollah etc came out of thin air *just* because "muslims want to kill all of you"....

[EarthNeedsHope]

11. I agree with the central point but I think the central difference here is

that Al Qaeda has resorted to illegal violence for their resistance and Iran and Venezuela are going through the proper legal and diplomatic channels for self-defense. That may get them destroyed in the end, but they did choose the higher road.