|
|
|
 |
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
|
|
Posted on 10/07/2002 7:35:55 AM PDT by rightwing2
The election of a former Communist and current Communist coalition leader like Lula will inaugerate a new Cold War in Latin America to be played out between the US and its enemies who are members of the Sino-Russian rogue state axis. Its going to get interesting. It will be very unfortunate if Lula elects a lot of socialists to Congress on his substantial coattails because it is the Brazilian Congress that is the country's best hope for opposing Lula's Marxist and anti-American policies. Lula is backed by two Communist parties, two Marxist parties and one centrist party a coalition which could give him a pretty strong voting bloc in Congress. His party alone may have won nearly 30% of the seats in play.
Lula isn't going to need many votes from his fellow Marxists and socialists who were defeated to win the final vote in three weeks. Gomes is the candidate of a party that broke off from one of Brazil's two Communist Presidents ten years ago. Lula should have most of those votes in the bag. Serra on the other hand has got a long road to hoe to pull off an upset. Perhaps, the US should start covertly funneling money to his campaign just like we did to the democratically elected President of Yugoslavia to defeat another Communist President.
If Lula is elected President later this month, we can start asking the question "who lost Brazil" and why the Bush Administration failed to do anything to speak out or try to avert this disturbing outcome. The Bush Administration's massive neglect of Latin America is about to reap BIG dividends for Castro's strategy of Communizing the whole of Latin America. Based on their inaction, which may be explained by the President's illogical fixation on non-threat Saddam Hussein, the Administration appears to lack any concept of the much greater threat which Lula's Communist takeover of Brazil will mean for the US. Brazil built, but never tested, two atomic bombs in the early 1990s. Look for Lula to test one sometime soon and make Brazil the world's newest nuclear power. Lula has pledged to aid Marxist takeovers of Argentina, Bolivia, Peru, Uruguay and Columbia. He has pleged to ally himself militarily with Communist China. Things are about to get very hairy for us in our own hemisphere.
You can find part 2 at the following URL address:
Red Storm Rising over Latin America Part 2
If this is the case, then I would like to see the Bush Administration stop all this emotional crap about promoting "freedom and democracy" all over the world. Americans like to promote freedom and democracy as long as the people in question vote for the candidate we like better.
Bush needs to pay attention to LatinAmerica - else very soon we will be facing a new Communist bloc to our south.
Then so be it. Any American investor who loans money to Third World countries knows damned well what the risks are, and should be hung out to dry. Otherwise, American banks that receive junk-bond interest rates for loans that are effectively guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the United States are defrauding U.S. taxpayers on an enormous scale.
Bush needs to pay attention to LatinAmerica - else very soon we will be facing a new Communist bloc to our south.
The difference between this "new" Communist bloc and the old Eastern bloc is that this one will be elected by the people of these countries in free and open elections. Some people in this world were born to be peasants, and there is nothing the United States is going to do about it in the long run.
I would also add that the Bush Administration has a more serious problem to deal with -- a totalitarian Communist government in the state of New Jersey.
Bull. If anyone should "pay the price" to save Wall Street's butt by financing Latin American candidates who won't default their nations' debt and stick Wall Street investment bankers with the bill, it should be those with the most to lose - Wall Street investment bankers, not the American middle class.
We shouldn't be forced to pay to guarantee junior executives at Goldman Sachs fat bonuses no matter how stupid deals they enter into.
The "John Saxon" essays - by an angry blue-collar Southerner, for those like him!
|
|
|
|
|
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
|
|
Jackson is a menace to our country.
Would you tolerate him after the "divine mobs" start going out and seizing property?
As for the emotional crap ("freedom and democracy"), notice the "and" between them. Lula may be about democracy, but is not about freedom (particularly property rights).
And the mobs that come to seize my property aren't going to be coming here from Brazil -- they'll be coming from Washington, D.C.
If you will follow all the links, and the links within those links, you will see that all the shadowy "alphabet-soup" terror and "liberation" groups share ties.
The purpose of terrorism is destabilizing a country, so the "liberators" can prevail. Latin America ( among other regions ) has a long history of being a pot just on the boil.
Your argument in post #3 sounded to me like a moral argument along the lines of "what right do we have to interfere" and my response was that since we (presumably being conservatives) would not tolerate Lula here (regardless of how big a majority he won) why should we accept him elsewhere (particularly if like Chavez it will be one man, one vote, once).
Now you have switched gears to a "best interests" argument.
And the mobs that come to seize my property aren't going to be coming here from Brazil -- they'll be coming from Washington, D.C.
FYI, both Lula (Brazil) and Chavez (Venezuela) support the Marxist narco-guerillas of Columbia as well as other such movements in South America. Once South America is ruled by like minded individuals, there is no reason for them not to turn north into Central America (and the first state in the line of fire there is Panama, with the Panama canal as the prize).
FYI, both Lula (Brazil) and Chavez (Venezuela) support the Marxist narco-guerillas of Columbia as well as other such movements in South America. Once South America is ruled by like minded individuals, there is no reason for them not to turn north into Central America (and the first state in the line of fire there is Panama, with the Panama canal as the prize).
Remember -- these countries don't have a drug problem; the United States does. If we are such a decadent nation that we cannot control ourselves and need narcotics to get us through our daily lives, then we have no business complaining about "narco-guerillas" in South America.
I would also add that in the larger scheme of things the Panama Canal is little more than an old, outdated waterway that is of little value to anyone except third-rate nations with limited shipping potential. Most of the major maritime vessels that are used by the United States or serve U.S. consumers are too large to fit through the canal anyway.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.