"Coup d'etat" in Honduras

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

This is horrible and despicable foreign policy on the part of the Obama administration, to say the least. They are siding with a despot who flagrantly violated Honduras' constitution, and both of the other arms of government agreed that he needed to be removed from power.

No it isn't, we are siding with a democratically elected President, even if we don't particularly care for him. Ousting him with a military coup goes against democracy. The way to oust him is through impeachment proceedings or something similar as put forth by their Constitution

Have you ever lived in a country like Honduras? Not trying to insult or anything... but things do not operate like they do here in the U.S. Here we are fortunate to have somewhat of a system of checks and balances. Impeachment proceedings would have likely never finished.

Where as in Banana Republics all Branches of the Government are corrupt? The one who has the backing of the military usually wins out. There are probably no good guys in this, just a bunch of power hungry assholes who could care less about the people.

 

[alchemize]

When is Steeplerot going to join in on this thread? RD has to be feeling lonely...

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: alchemize
When is Steeplerot going to join in on this thread? RD has to be feeling lonely...

Your attempt to characterize me as a Chavez sympathizer is totally off base and lazy. I'm not saying that President was a good guy and shouldn't have been removed, just not by a Military Coup.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: alchemize
When is Steeplerot going to join in on this thread? RD has to be feeling lonely...

Your attempt to characterize me as a Chavez sympathizer is totally off base and lazy. I'm not saying that President was a good guy and shouldn't have been removed, just not by a Military Coup.

Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck...but I agree, you're not a Chavez sympathizer, you're an Obama apologist. And hence why you are taking Obama's position.

Zelaya was ignoring lawful supreme court rulings and congressional actions. In effect, he was committing treason. The military only acted after the supreme court directed it to, again with congressional approval. That's not a Military Coup.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: alchemize
When is Steeplerot going to join in on this thread? RD has to be feeling lonely...

Your attempt to characterize me as a Chavez sympathizer is totally off base and lazy. I'm not saying that President was a good guy and shouldn't have been removed, just not by a Military Coup.

Stop. It wasn't a military coup. The army didn't just grab their guns and toss out the president because they didn't like him. The president was in violation of their constitution, and the Congress and Supreme Courts of Honduras both agreed that he needed to be removed. For all we know, that might be their nation's legal way of removing a crazy despot violating their laws and trying to power-grab.

Coup D'etat

"a sudden and decisive action in politics, esp. one resulting in a change of government illegally or by force."

The government wasn't overthrown, it wasn't done illegally, and there wasn't a shoot-out. A despot president violating their constitution was removed from power. This process was approved by the other two wings of their government.

Stop misleading and mis-characterizing what happened in Honduras.

Honduras Report

"But Honduran leaders insist that the world does not understand what happened here. They say that Zelaya was found guilty by a Supreme Court tribunal, that his arrest by the military was legal and that Zelaya was attempting to circumvent the Congress and the courts by staging a referendum vote on Sunday. The referendum, they say, could have led to a change in the constitution that would have allowed Zelaya to run for the top office again after his term ended in January 2010. "

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: alchemize
When is Steeplerot going to join in on this thread? RD has to be feeling lonely...

Your attempt to characterize me as a Chavez sympathizer is totally off base and lazy. I'm not saying that President was a good guy and shouldn't have been removed, just not by a Military Coup.

People spend years studying the US Constitution. They make lives/careers out of it. The fact that you have mastered the Honduran constitution in 72 hours is simply amazing. :thumbsup:

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: alchemize
When is Steeplerot going to join in on this thread? RD has to be feeling lonely...

Your attempt to characterize me as a Chavez sympathizer is totally off base and lazy. I'm not saying that President was a good guy and shouldn't have been removed, just not by a Military Coup.

Stop. It wasn't a military coup. The army didn't just grab their guns and toss out the president because they didn't like him. The president was in violation of their constitution, and the Congress and Supreme Courts of Honduras both agreed that he needed to be removed. For all we know, that might be their nation's legal way of removing a crazy despot violating their laws and trying to power-grab.

Coup D'etat

"a sudden and decisive action in politics, esp. one resulting in a change of government illegally or by force."

The government wasn't overthrown, it wasn't done illegally, and there wasn't a shoot-out. A despot president violating their constitution was removed from power. This process was approved by the other two wings of their government.

Stop misleading and mis-characterizing what happened in Honduras.

Honduras Report

"But Honduran leaders insist that the world does not understand what happened here. They say that Zelaya was found guilty by a Supreme Court tribunal, that his arrest by the military was legal and that Zelaya was attempting to circumvent the Congress and the courts by staging a referendum vote on Sunday. The referendum, they say, could have led to a change in the constitution that would have allowed Zelaya to run for the top office again after his term ended in January 2010. "

According to Larry Birns, director of the Washington-based Council on Hemispheric Affairs, the Honduran Supreme Court is one of the most corrupt institutions in Latin America Text Just because they say it was legal doesn't necessarily make it so.

They are all a bunch of power hungry clowns there and there are probably no good guys among them including the President who was ousted by the Military

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: alchemize
When is Steeplerot going to join in on this thread? RD has to be feeling lonely...

Your attempt to characterize me as a Chavez sympathizer is totally off base and lazy. I'm not saying that President was a good guy and shouldn't have been removed, just not by a Military Coup.

People spend years studying the US Constitution. They make lives/careers out of it. The fact that you have mastered the Honduran constitution in 72 hours is simply amazing. :thumbsup:

Well if you had bothered to read a previous post of mine you'll see where I posted that I could be wrong because I'm not familiar with their Constitution but I'm betting that there are those in Obama's Administration that are familiar with it along with experts from the other OAS States who are also condemning this as a military coup.

On the other hand you guys have nothing to base your arguments on other than Knee jerk reactions and the word of an extremely corrupt institution known as the Honduran Supreme Court.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: alchemize
When is Steeplerot going to join in on this thread? RD has to be feeling lonely...

Your attempt to characterize me as a Chavez sympathizer is totally off base and lazy. I'm not saying that President was a good guy and shouldn't have been removed, just not by a Military Coup.

People spend years studying the US Constitution. They make lives/careers out of it. The fact that you have mastered the Honduran constitution in 72 hours is simply amazing. :thumbsup:

Well if you had bothered to read a previous post of mine you'll see where I posted that I could be wrong because I'm not familiar with their Constitution but I'm betting that there are those in Obama's Administration that are familiar with it along with experts from the other OAS States who are also condemning this as a military coup.

On the other hand you guys have nothing to base your arguments on other than Knee jerk reactions and the word of an extremely corrupt institution known as the Honduran Supreme Court.

Uh hi, we know that they followed their laws in removing the president. Nothing "knee jerk" about it. Meanwhile, you're the one with the whole "knee-jerk reaction", where your whole excuse is judging the Honduras government as "corrupt". Nice try in your attempt to deflect and defuse to save face.

It also sounds like you're judging and condemning how another nation takes care of its affairs...sounds a bit like saber rattling to me. That's a pretty Bush-like trait. I thought Obama wasn't going to meddle in other country's affairs?

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn


On the other hand you guys have nothing to base your arguments on other than Knee jerk reactions and the word of an extremely corrupt institution known as the Honduran Supreme Court.

The only knee-jerkers in this situation are the Leftist countries like Cuba and Venezuela, with Chavez even threatening military action because his comrade was ousted before he could go for another unconstitutional term. Obama is also trying to distance the US from looking like we had anything to do with it because of our history in SA.

None of them are looking out for the Honduran people or constitution.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Uh hi, we know that they followed their laws in removing the president.

Why because those in power now say it was?

Nothing "knee jerk" about it. Meanwhile, your whole excuse is judging the Honduras government as "corrupt". Nice try in your attempt to deflect and defuse to save face.

Save face? Why would I worry about saving face, I'm just debating with fellow know nothings like myself. I could give a fuck if I was wrong. I'm just not convinced that I am

It also sounds like you're judging and condemning how another nation takes care of its affairs...sounds a bit like saber rattling to me. That's a pretty Bush-like trait. I thought Obama wasn't going to meddle in other country's affairs?

If it was Bush like we would have invaded, killed thousands of innocent Hondurans as collateral damage and totally destabilized the region.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
If it was Bush like we would have invaded, killed thousands of innocent Hondurans as collateral damage and totally destabilized the region.

Just like your buddies Chavez and Ortega are threatening to do, and apparently your president is in agreement with, since he has condemned Honduras and said nothing about the military threats from Chavez, Ortega and others.

Oh, the irony.

:laugh:

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: Red Dawn


On the other hand you guys have nothing to base your arguments on other than Knee jerk reactions and the word of an extremely corrupt institution known as the Honduran Supreme Court.

The only knee-jerkers in this situation are the Leftist countries like Cuba and Venezuela, with Chavez even threatening military action because his comrade was ousted before he could go for another unconstitutional term. Obama is also trying to distance the US from looking like we had anything to do with it because of our history in SA.

None of them are looking out for the Honduran people or constitution.

Didn't the OAS condemn this Coup? I'm pretty sure it did with all the member states agreeing. That's more than just the leftist triumphant of Cuba, Venezuala and Bolivia, that's pretty much every country in the Hemisphere.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
If it was Bush like we would have invaded, killed thousands of innocent Hondurans as collateral damage and totally destabilized the region.

Just like your buddies Chavez and Ortega are threatening to do, and apparently your president is in agreement with, since he has condemned Honduras and said nothing about the military threats from Chavez, Ortega and others.

Oh, the irony.

:laugh:

The irony is that you have nothing so you try to associate me with Ortega and Chavez, where you get that I don't know. I do know that our President is in agreement with the other OAS members which is pretty much every country on this Hemisphere. Are they all in cahoots with Chavez too?:roll:

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: alchemize
When is Steeplerot going to join in on this thread? RD has to be feeling lonely...

Your attempt to characterize me as a Chavez sympathizer is totally off base and lazy. I'm not saying that President was a good guy and shouldn't have been removed, just not by a Military Coup.

People spend years studying the US Constitution. They make lives/careers out of it. The fact that you have mastered the Honduran constitution in 72 hours is simply amazing. :thumbsup:

Well if you had bothered to read a previous post of mine you'll see where I posted that I could be wrong because I'm not familiar with their Constitution but I'm betting that there are those in Obama's Administration that are familiar with it along with experts from the other OAS States who are also condemning this as a military coup.

On the other hand you guys have nothing to base your arguments on other than Knee jerk reactions and the word of an extremely corrupt institution known as the Honduran Supreme Court.

Just like under Bush, the experts on such subject matters will come up with justification to satisfy their bosses.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
If it was Bush like we would have invaded, killed thousands of innocent Hondurans as collateral damage and totally destabilized the region.

Just like your buddies Chavez and Ortega are threatening to do, and apparently your president is in agreement with, since he has condemned Honduras and said nothing about the military threats from Chavez, Ortega and others.

Oh, the irony.

:laugh:

The irony is that you have nothing so you try to associate me with Ortega and Chavez, where you get that I don't know. I do know that our President is in agreement with the other OAS members which is pretty much every country on this Hemisphere. Are they all in cahoots with Chavez too?:roll:

Funny how Bush wasn't your president, but you went out of your way to correct me. I did not vote for Obama.

And knowing your political leanings and your postings, I would say you are far more sympathetic to despots like Zelaya, Chavez and others than you are to the government of Honduras which followed their laws to remove their corrupt president who violated their Constitution, and this removal was approved by their Congress and Supreme Court.

To which you respond by...crying that the Honduras government is "widely known to be corrupt", entirely ignoring the facts that they followed their laws, and instead you went straight for the heart strings.

You sound pretty imperialistic there...imposing your beliefs on Honduras, when they followed their laws.

:laugh:

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well if you had bothered to read a previous post of mine you'll see where I posted that I could be wrong because I'm not familiar with their Constitution but I'm betting that there are those in Obama's Administration that are familiar with it along with experts from the other OAS States who are also condemning this as a military coup.

On the other hand you guys have nothing to base your arguments on other than Knee jerk reactions and the word of an extremely corrupt institution known as the Honduran Supreme Court.

Just like under Bush, the experts on such subject matters will come up with justification to satisfy their bosses.

Then why is the OAS condemning this ? Are they doing it to support Obama? I can tell you that if there was a lot of disagreement among the Members States it would support the argument that it was legal but there isn't which leads me to think that this action taken in Honduras stinks to high heavan.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
If it was Bush like we would have invaded, killed thousands of innocent Hondurans as collateral damage and totally destabilized the region.

Just like your buddies Chavez and Ortega are threatening to do, and apparently your president is in agreement with, since he has condemned Honduras and said nothing about the military threats from Chavez, Ortega and others.

Oh, the irony.

:laugh:

The irony is that you have nothing so you try to associate me with Ortega and Chavez, where you get that I don't know. I do know that our President is in agreement with the other OAS members which is pretty much every country on this Hemisphere. Are they all in cahoots with Chavez too?:roll:

Funny how Bush wasn't your president, but you went out of your way to correct me. I did not vote for Obama.

And knowing your political leanings, I would say you are far more sympathetic to Chavez and others than you are to the government of Honduras which followed their laws to remove their corrupt president, with the approval of their Congress and Supreme Court.

To which you respond by...crying that the Honduras government is "widely known to be corrupt", entirely ignoring the facts that they followed their laws, and instead you went straight for the heart strings.

:laugh:

Well Bush was my President to mine and many other Americans chagrin just like Obama is yours to your chagrin.

Regarding my allegations that the Honduran Government is corrupt, all I have to go on is what the experts say seeing that like you I really have no other way of knowing. I'm basing my argument on what I've read which is very limited. What are you basing your argument on?


And with regards to Chavez, I think he's a despot and a destabilizing force in Latin America and wish him no good. If he was to follow through with his threat to invade Honduras I would totally support military action against him and his nation just like I supported military action against Hussien and Iraq when they invaded Kuwait.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
If it was Bush like we would have invaded, killed thousands of innocent Hondurans as collateral damage and totally destabilized the region.

Just like your buddies Chavez and Ortega are threatening to do, and apparently your president is in agreement with, since he has condemned Honduras and said nothing about the military threats from Chavez, Ortega and others.

Oh, the irony.

:laugh:

The irony is that you have nothing so you try to associate me with Ortega and Chavez, where you get that I don't know. I do know that our President is in agreement with the other OAS members which is pretty much every country on this Hemisphere. Are they all in cahoots with Chavez too?:roll:

Funny how Bush wasn't your president, but you went out of your way to correct me. I did not vote for Obama.

And knowing your political leanings, I would say you are far more sympathetic to Chavez and others than you are to the government of Honduras which followed their laws to remove their corrupt president, with the approval of their Congress and Supreme Court.

To which you respond by...crying that the Honduras government is "widely known to be corrupt", entirely ignoring the facts that they followed their laws, and instead you went straight for the heart strings.

:laugh:

Well Bush was my President to mine and many other Americans chagrin just like Obama is yours to your chagrin.

Regarding my allegations that the Honduran Government is corrupt, all I have to go on is what the experts say seeing that like you I really have no other way of knowing. I'm basing my argument on what I've read which is very limited. What are you basing your argument on?

Just like you, I'm basing my opinion on what I've read and heard, seeing as how neither of us have personal, first-hand experience with Honduras.

I would also mention a certain caller from Honduras who called a certain AM talk radio host about what was happening in Honduras, but that would just send you into a leftism, so I shall refrain.

In regards to your edit about Chavez, that is good to hear. You are one of the more reasonable "lefties" to debate with around here.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
I would also mention a certain caller from Honduras who called a certain AM talk radio host about what was happening in Honduras, but that would just send you into a leftism, so I shall refrain.

You see I never said that I supported Zelaya, I just don't believe that he should have been ousted by a Military coup authorized by an equally corrupt Honduran Supreme Court.

If you can prove to me beyond a reasonable doubt that this action taken by the new rulers of Honduras was legal and Constitutional then I'll admit that I was wrong.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
In regards to your edit about Chavez, that is good to hear. You are one of the more reasonable "lefties" to debate with around here.

You see I don't consider myself a Lefty though those on the Far Right are always categorizing me as one. Then again I've been accused of being a Right Winger by some of the real Lefties on this forum. I think what that makes me is an anti extremist.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
I would also mention a certain caller from Honduras who called a certain AM talk radio host about what was happening in Honduras, but that would just send you into a leftism, so I shall refrain.

You see I never said that I supported Zelaya, I just don't believe that he should have been ousted by a Military coup authorized by an equally corrupt Honduran Supreme Court.

If you can prove to me beyond a reasonable doubt that this action taken by the new rulers of Honduras was legal and Constitutional then I'll admit that I was wrong.

Both Congress and the Supreme Court approved of removing the president, because he was attempting to violate the constitution. The Honduras government is claiming they followed their rules. Who are we to say they're wrong? If they were lying, it would be pretty obvious to almost anyone by reading their constitution. The fact that the two other branches of government were in agreement about removing the president who was violating the constitution (which is not disputable...he was because of the term limits snafu) is pretty telling.

Just because you, Obama and others don't approve of how the Honduras government handled this situation does not make it illegal according to Honduras law, which is what matters here.

 

[tk149]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Wow, Term Limits are not a "good thing" at all. Certainly not good enough to warrant a Coup. As long as the proper procedures are followed regarding changing of a Constitution, removing Term Limits should not result in Military Coups.

Bolded the important part.

Term limits reduce the risk of entrenched power, thereby reducing the threat of overriding the Constitution or subverting/threatening those who can vote to change the Constitution.

Term limits are good. We could have the best President in history in office, and I would still oppose removal of term limits, because I would be afraid of his successors.

Based on the comments in this thread (especially the Constitution clause on term limits), it sounds like Zelaya violated the law, and the other government branches called him on it. So why is our government supporting him?

In any government conflict, I tend to trust the side that is trying to decentralize power.

I think this event brings up a good point. What do you do when the person (President) charged with obeying the Constitution and executing laws refuses to do so? What's your backup plan, especially if time is short, as with Honduras?

What's the US's backup plan? I don't think we have one - at least, not one detailed in the Constitution. What would we do if the POTUS pulled a Zelaya two weeks before the end of his second term? Impeachment takes a long time.

Given the recent trend of Presidents increasing their powers, maybe we should start planning ahead.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: tk149

Originally posted by: sandorski
Wow, Term Limits are not a "good thing" at all. Certainly not good enough to warrant a Coup. As long as the proper procedures are followed regarding changing of a Constitution, removing Term Limits should not result in Military Coups.

Bolded the important part.

Term limits reduce the risk of entrenched power, thereby reducing the threat of overriding the Constitution or subverting/threatening those who can vote to change the Constitution.

Term limits are good. We could have the best President in history in office, and I would still oppose removal of term limits, because I would be afraid of his successors.

Based on the comments in this thread (especially the Constitution clause on term limits), it sounds like Zelaya violated the law, and the other government branches called him on it. So why is our government supporting him?

In any government conflict, I tend to trust the side that is trying to decentralize power.

I think this event brings up a good point. What do you do when the person (President) charged with obeying the Constitution and executing laws refuses to do so? What's your backup plan, especially if time is short, as with Honduras?

What's the US's backup plan? I don't think we have one - at least, not one detailed in the Constitution. What would we do if the POTUS pulled a Zelaya two weeks before the end of his second term? Impeachment takes a long time.

Given the recent trend of Presidents increasing their powers, maybe we should start planning ahead.

We have the 22nd amendment, which was enacted because of FDR. Other than that, however...we don't really have a "backup plan". Amendments can be changed or repealed.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
*snip*

How do you feel about the warmongering Chavez rattling sabers threatening invasion over something that is really none of his country's business, just because he is trying to advance the cause of leftist dictators in SA?