Brazzil

Since 1989 Trying to Understand Brazil

Home

----------

Brazilian Eyelash Enhancer & Conditioner Makeup

----------

Get Me Earrings

----------

Buy Me Handbags

----------

Find Me Diamond

----------

Wholesale Clothing On Sammydress.com

----------

Brautkleider 2013

----------

Online shopping at Tmart.com and Free Shipping

----------

Wholesale Brazilian Hair Extensions on DHgate.com

----------

Global Online shopping with free shipping at Handgiftbox

----------

Search

Custom Search
Members : 22767
Content : 3832
Content View Hits : 33087576

Who's Online

We have 522 guests online



Rich and Independent Brazil Seems Poised to Become LatAm's New Uncle Sam PDF Print E-mail
2010 - March 2010
Written by William Mathis   
Monday, 15 March 2010 19:14

Green yellow eagle By now the emergence of Brazil as a major power not only in the Western Hemisphere, but also on the world stage, is an undisputed fact. The country, until recently mentioned outside its borders for seldom more than in reference to the Girl from Ipanema, is now on everybody's lips.

Brazil is possibly one of the globe's most popular and successful nations, experiencing limited negative impact from the global economic crisis that ravaged Western economies, and having beaten out both Chicago and Tokyo for home field advantage in the 2016 Summer Olympics.

But as Brazil wows the international crowds with its economic, diplomatic and athletic prowess, the distance that the nation still needs to traverse before solidifying its South American powerhouse status could be formidable.

One of the most remarkable aspects of Brazil's supersonic growth is the leverage it has developed on a continent so recently dominated by the U.S. foreign policy agenda. While its government may not be seeking a socialist Bolivarian Revolution, it is far enough to the left as to be deemed sabotage-worthy by Cold War standards and has perfectly cordial ties with left-leaning ideological foes of Washington, such as Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, and Iran.

On March 3, 2010, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made a stopover in Brazil to meet with President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Foreign Minister Celso Amorim to discuss a central issue for Washington's foreign policymakers, deterring Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

While Iran's nuclear ambitions thus far have not been proven to extend beyond peaceful energy purposes, the Obama administration is not taking any chances and with distinctly mixed results has been attempting to gather support around the world for tougher sanctions against Tehran.

Despite not too subtle pressure from Clinton, Lula and Amorim were prepared to not give in to her demands, refusing to support sanctions outright, although not ruling out the possibility of backing them at a later date. Similarly, in November of 2009, Brazil abstained from voting against Iran in an IAEA vote in the aftermath of the disclosure of the secret existence of an uranium enrichment site in Qom.

In May, the Brazilian president is scheduled to meet with his Iranian counterpart, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. This type of resistance to Washington's focused policy goals has become characteristic of Brazilian foreign policy making, demonstrating to the US and the rest of the world that the country's decisions are no longer automatically based on Washington's interests, but rather its own.

However, despite Brasilia's swelling activism it may be premature to rule out Washington's influence on Brazil's policy decisions. The specific statement that support for sanctions could come later may possibly be linked to election season politics.

In addition to the Brazilian president and foreign minister, Dilma Rousseff, Lula's pick to be the next president, was also present for negotiations with Secretary Clinton. With presidential elections looming on October 3, it would be unwise for Rousseff to portray herself as bending to Washington's will even if more supportive measures toward the U.S. are indeed planned for the future.

Battle Wounds

In the wake of the bitter diplomatic row that has been ongoing as a result of the 2009 coup against the democratically-elected government of Honduras, there is much fence-mending to be done to heal the somewhat fractured relationship between Brazil and the U.S. Brazilian policy makers were among the most out-spoken critics of Tegucigalpa's de facto government of golpista Roberto Micheletti and one of President Manuel Zelaya's most powerful proponents. They even housed the ousted leader in their embassy for months after his secret return to Honduras.

While initially taking a far more cautious approach than most other hemispheric countries in denouncing the coup, the U.S. eventually joined ranks with its Latin American peers. However, its support for Zelaya was short-lived and amounted to far less than meets the eye, seemingly geared more to courting hard-line Senator DeMint's (R-SC) release of his "hold" on several State Department nominations than fighting to exonerate any democratic principle.

As a result, the Obama administration ended up eventually backing elections without the ousted president's a priori restoration, a move strongly opposed by a majority of countries in the region, including Brazil.

With the assured support of the US for the compromised elections, any reconciliation dialogue between Zelaya and Micheletti became irrelevant and ultimately dissipated completely. While few of the region's nations recognized the legitimacy of the elections that gave office to newly elected President Porfirio Lobo as the new leader of Honduras on 29 November 2009, he was inaugurated two months later.

Despite its best diplomatic efforts, Brazil was ultimately unable to alter the course of events in Honduras, in effect losing a testy diplomatic tiff with the US. For the time being, Brazil continues to stand by its position that presidential elections conducted under the tutelage of the illegal government headed by Micheletti were prima facie illegitimate.

But as Brazil tries to preserve its stand, events in Honduras are grinding on, and it's just a matter of time before Washington will be able to work its will on Lula. Meanwhile, Washington will be doing what it can to force the country and the region to forget the tawdry events that began on June 28.

On the same day that Clinton was meeting with the Brazilian president, she also was stopping in Costa Rica to announce, among other news, that the US$ 31 million in US aid to Honduras that had been suspended during the coup would now be restored. Clinton also praised the Lobo government and urged the region's leaders to reinstate Honduras to the OAS.

If the State Department was humiliated by the outcome in Honduras - since it surely cannot say that its shabby script showed any class - it was Brazilian diplomacy that upheld the principle of honor and pro-democracy driven policy over the Honduran affair. One could even argue that it was the Bureau of Western Hemispheric Affairs rather that Zelaya that played the role of the joker.

The US has clearly pursued a near-unilateral position on the issue, isolating itself from regional leaders like Brazil by correctly assuming that some other nations like Oscar Arias' Costa Rica, Alan Garcia's Peru as well as Alvaro Uribe's Colombia were prepared to chuck their democratic fandango in favor of an open market and other little favors from Washington. Nevertheless, Washington correctly calculated that its self-serving strategy eventually would save the day with or without outside help.

Tectonic Shift

While Brazil may have been successfully side swiped by the US in relation to the former's principled response to the Honduran coup, the issue seems not to have in any way augmented Washington's political capital in the region, nor has it entirely convinced Brasília to be more malleable to Washington's demands.

Brazil's continued resistance to tougher sanctions on Iran coupled with its vocal criticism of the logic of President Obama's policy is only part of that country's continued flair for independence. Brazil then went on to prove itself to be capable of leadership in the aftermath of the devastating earthquake in Haiti, as it continued its sometimes troubled role of coordinating UN relief efforts on the islands.

At the same time Brazil has made significant steps to replace what many now see as the lame duck OAS now rivaled by a new bloc of Caribbean and Latin American States consisting of an expanded Rio Group, which excludes the US along with Canada. The now expanded Rio Group has traditionally been seen as a talk show and little else.

Now Brazil appears driven to institutionalize the group, turning it into a far more powerful actor in the region which rapidly could come to rival the importance of the OAS, or even replace it. Washington already has been feeling somewhat isolated in the OAS lately, where for decades it has been the sole nation to continue to oppose Cuba's reintegration into the organization, an issue that it brought up once again at the most recent UN General Assembly.

A preeminent Rio Bloc, free of any US involvement, could come to further isolate the US from the region while confirming Brazil's leadership position which long has been in the offing. The independent and laid back style of Brazil's foreign policy making is warmly welcomed in the region as a friendlier and more respectful alternative to Washington's traditional dictates, which in the past has treated Latin America with little respect.

If Brazil can maintain its current rate of growth, neither the US nor the rest of the global community will be able to ignore its importance, especially as it comes to occupy a defining role in a region that is home to some of the largest deposits of oil, natural gas, lithium and scores of other commodities.

Such importance may even be transformed into a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, a feat that Brasília has long sought after and which would likely permanently alter the balance of power both regionally and globally.

William Mathis is a research associate at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA) - www.coha.org. The organization is a think tank established in 1975 to discuss and promote inter-American relationship. Email: coha@coha.org.



Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Reddit! Del.icio.us! Mixx! Free and Open Source Software News Google! Live! Facebook! StumbleUpon! TwitThis Joomla Free PHP
Comments (29)Add Comment
I concur...
written by Leo Boneville, March 15, 2010
A very inciteful column... I agree with many of the statements in here.. I hope Brazil can prove itself to be a real leader on a global stage!

Leo Boneville
...
written by hunh?, March 16, 2010
Brazil's continued resistance to tougher sanctions on Iran coupled with its vocal criticism of the logic of President Obama's policy is only part of that country's continued flair for independence


Brazil has not offered any evidence contradicting the intelligence and reports from various undercover agents and journalists from various countriesmonitoring the Irans' development of nuclear weapons. Instead, Lula seems to be just getting headlines for thumbing his nose at the US, when in fact it is a multilateral initiative involving Russia, China and EU nations. Lula can play fast and loose with the facts, but in time, such an alliance with Iran will only tarnish his credibility on the world stage. Everyone knows Ajmedinijad and his regime are brutalizing their own people who are simply demonstrating in the streets against rigged elections. Why is Brazil and Lula hugging this tyrant when the Iranians are desperately trying to oust him from power? Is this the voice of the new superpower you speak of? Why do you believe this pathetic fiasco is a mark of distinction or "flair" ? Does it not matter that this regime is currently torturing, beating and murdering it's own people for peacefully protesting?????? It does to me and other people in the world who believe in justice, and Lula hugging this tyrant only mocks the suffering of the Iranians and makes me lose respect for him and anyone else in Brazil naive enough to believe the ridiculous claims about Iran. Petrobras has several hundred million dollars tied up in investments in Iran. This is the reason Lula is hugging this tyrant. You can't spin this shameful deed into a badge of honor. The Iranian people are more offended than Americans by this alliance. This is a regime that says it will wipe Israel off the map if obtains nuclear weapons, and you want us to believe that A. is to be defended? He denies the existence of the holocaust. This is the kind of alliances the new super power is making? pretty pathetic.

And what are you celebrating here: some fantasy that a local superpower supplants a greater super power (the US)? This seems to be the great fantasy of so many Brazilians. Of course China is the most likely candidate to supplant the US in the future. Yet even if Brazil were to supplant the US tomorrow, what would this prove? It has so many internal problems, not the least of which includes the near quasi-civil war between the rich and poor. What moral vision does Brazil offer that is greater than the US? I don't see much. It has modeled itself on the US so much, that it is just one other intensely capitalistic nation, yet with an even greater disparity in wealth and power between its ruling class an poor. And despite the fairy tale of racial equality Brazilians like to spin, the US has made much greater progress in fighting racism and its inequities. So the rich in Brazil are getting richer and now they have an economy larger than Italy's. Should this really impress the world? So many twisted and perverse ideas of the US, flourishing on the bitter resentment of those who just want Brazil to be the next US. Why doesn't Lula and Brazil do something dramatic to alleviate the poverty there instead of hugging tyrants like Iran's A.? I would be more impressed by its "supersonic" growth if it were to seriously improve the life of the poor. Yet I suspect all this nationalistic boasting only works to bolster the Brazilian ruling class. If Brazil could mprove the human rights of its own people, then THIS would clearly gain the world's attention and respect, whether it had a GNP that was lower or greater than this US.
???
written by v-8, March 16, 2010
and how's brazil relationship to iran different from the us's relationship to the middle east? last time I checked there were tons of oil tie-ins, tons of human rights breach, and the list goes on...
Viva Brazil
written by Pedro Animala, March 16, 2010
Where was "western" condemnation when India, Pakistan and Israel developed their nuclear weapons? Where was condemnation when apartheid South Africa began researching for such aim?
We are quick to point out the imperfections of those whom we abhor, yet embrace the wrongs of those whom bow before us.
Iran has every right to develop nuclear research. Brazil has every right to befriend whomever they like. For far too long Latin America has been ignored except when a new dictator was needed by Washington. Those days are gone. Of course, there are a few governments that have not matured enough to see outside Washington's bubble, but overall, Latin America, and specially South America has chosen a path of their own, and their economies shall prosper because of this.

Empires rise and empires fall.. and USA's fall is unstoppable. Some may not like it, but the world will be a better place without this in-humanistic empire.
So wait a minute...
written by Leo Boneville, March 16, 2010
This is not about a cold war between the US and Brazil, this is about a nation finally fufilling its destiny, to be independent to do as it wishes, for years Brazil had to do and to follow what the United States said, because its economy was too fragille to stand on its on.

Brazil's economy is robust enough that they can pursue Brazilian interests without having to worry about if the decision they made will anger the almighty USA.

Brazilians don't support terrorism.. In fact, We are agains't all acts of it, but the question here is should Iran be able to pursue a Nuclear Program for peace purposes... the answer is YES, they are a sovereign nation and they should be able to do whatever they want..

Now, Im agains't Amadihnajed regime for all its human rights violations, freedom of speech, and many other acts agains't it citizens but like V8 said... The US has put people in power both in Afghanastan and Iraq that have committed the same crimes, those people controlling the state today are feared by their citizens.. Women don't have rights in Iraq to this day, they are still pursecuted..

Lets be serious here for a second, President Lula is doing whats best for Brazil.. We have no enemies around the world, that alone is a model for the world. PEACE

Leo Boneville
The limits of my right is set by my nighbour's
written by Clean Slate, March 16, 2010
The last thing I would call myself is that I am leftist or worst: radical...or to the contrary/ libertarian. I think for myself. Full stop.

Most international leaders, particularly from developed nations, are hard questioning Brazil's current position regarding the proximity established with Iran.

OK. It is fine to question. But what about the silence of US (politicians, media, and everybody else) on the atrocities inflicted by Israel to the Palestinians in their own territory???? Don’t Americans get informed? Don’t they travel to the West Bank? Have they seen their misery? It seems that some world leaders are very often using not just two, but as many standards as possible according to the convenience of the moment. They silence, when they want. They yell, when they wish.

Brazil is not a partner free of any misbehaviour in this or any history (vide the case of the Cuban dissidents...quite recent)...but equally NO OTHER country is that effective and adhere to humanitarian principles to the point of questioning Brazil's position regarding Iran (this is no way to defend Iran and it should be aware that Brazilians will not tolerate being used in international dispute...we are serious about that and this must be clear to Iran and to any existing dictatorial or theocratic power...there are limits to Brazilian support to a dialogue and feel that we have used is the last thing that interest us). If they were, if they had used their political supremacy and influence when the time was right and conditions were set, this question would be solved long ago...don’t come they now and question Brazil’s position. They have lost their condition to do so.

In time: I am against nuclear weapons, against fanaticism of any sort (whatever the religion, the ethnicity, the justification, etc). Nothing that is just and perfect is ever fanatical or extreme! It is a simple matter of logic!
hunh?
written by Lloyd Cata, March 16, 2010
Brazil has not offered any evidence contradicting the intelligence and reports from various undercover agents and journalists from various countries monitoring the Irans' development of nuclear weapons.

Sounds like the same 'intelligence' that led to the disaster of Iraq. Listen to yourself! Why would anyone believe the same people who didn't know the USSR was about to break up, who couldn't determine that India and Pakistan were about to 'go nuclear', who swore on the lives of American troops that Saddam had WMD?

No, I think its you who need the defend such accurate 'intelligence'. President Lula has said that he intends to 'talk directly' to the people involved. Look in Ahmadinejad's eyes and ask him directly what is his intent. What a novel idea! Lying to Israel and the Americans is one thing, but lying to Brazil would condemn Iran in the eyes of those who are willing to give the benefit of the doubt. Understood that Israel has to live with that doubt, but there would be no doubt if they would determine to live within the 1967 borders. So happy to see the US military finally understanding this.
...
written by João da Silva, March 16, 2010

Great comments, "Clean Slate".

Llyod Cata
written by João da Silva, March 16, 2010

So happy to see the US military finally understanding this.


Give me the link please.
João da Silva
written by Lloyd Cata, March 16, 2010
http://pulsemedia.org/2010/03/...es-at-risk

Never thought I see the day when I think 'maybe' the military will have to remove the political trash in the US. They have to speak out because they cannot sustain the world-wide animosity to US imperialism. Everywhere the soldiers go and try to make friends it always the same story, "your protecting the Zionists". At some point you have to understand what your 'really' dying for. smilies/sad.gif
Llyod Cata
written by João da Silva, March 16, 2010

Never thought I see the day when I think 'maybe' the military will have to remove the political trash in the US.


Petraeus? Holy Sh..smilies/cheesy.gif. We may not permit the trash to accumulate for such a long time. Through ballot, of course.smilies/wink.gif
The limits of my right are set by my nighbour's
written by Clean Slate, March 17, 2010
“A thing is not necessarily true because a man dies for it.”
Oscar Wilde

Many still die everyday day in fabricated wars based on lies. They die in the false belief that their cause is just. How something based on lies can ever be just, truthful? Millions are dying in vain. What a sorry state of affairs!

“Peace if possible, but truth at any rate”. (Martin Luther )

So simple, but so impossible when there is no political will. The simplest of the needs, the hardest to obtain from politicians when they do no want to exert their influence, when they twist and turn every single fact in order to boost their political profile at home (thinking on the next election win).


A ''No'' uttered from deepest conviction is better and greater than a ''Yes'' merely uttered to please, or what is worse, to avoid trouble. (Gandhi)

It is time to say a uttered NO to some who believe that theirs is the only just plight in the world, those who believe that their suffering is the only real one in the world. Some thousand children die from malnutrition, poverty related diseases, as traffic mules, soldiers in Africa’s poorest villages…that happens EVERY DAY and no they make no headline…there is no museum built to honour their cause….no dignitary deposits flowers in their thumb – they have none sometimes! NO decent place to be buried. It is time to say YES to peace, to a more just world. It is not utopia…it is just a world getting tired of lies, getting tired of people turning a blind eye to injustices, to inequalities. If you don’t see it happening, it is because you don’t have eyes to see (as it is in the Bible)

Just think of that:

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." (John F. Kennedy)
Clean Slate
written by Lloyd Cata, March 17, 2010
The limits of my right is set by my nighbour's

Well said!

Brazil is not a partner free of any misbehaviour in this or any history

The neighbors might have some who remember, and will not credit such 'clean hands' to the military regime. We have yet to see how this is going to be handled.

if they had used their political supremacy and influence when the time was right and conditions were set, this question would be solved long ago...don’t come they now and question Brazil’s position. They have lost their condition to do so.

My sincere congratulations, sir. I think you have precisely stated the case for Brazil's entry into the international diplomatic arena.

Yet, let's not get ahead of yourselves. Understand that there are minefields along the way. The issues are daunting by themselves. The personalities and their interests probably will be be the most difficult since Netanyahu and Ahmadinejad are both ideologues answerable to extremists in their own governments. Finally, there are all the regional and international players with 'interests' in the outcome.

Lula has about a year in office. Th most I can expect is that he will try to moderate Iran's inflammatory rhetoric while trying to bolster Palestinian rights. There is little he can do on the Israeli side of the equation. The Israelis are used to being fawned upon by the major powers of the US, the Russians, and the EU. Paying little attention to any UN edicts. Never concerned with any sanction because of its patronage by the US.
Clean Slate
written by Lloyd Cata, March 17, 2010
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." (John F. Kennedy)

Wow! All the quotes were good, but you really sneaked this one up on mesmilies/cheesy.gif Great job smilies/wink.gif

How strangely inevitable that these are the words every American will have to understand in the days to come.smilies/sad.gif
...
written by hunh?, March 18, 2010
Mr Cata:
The Israelis are used to being fawned upon by the major powers of the US, the Russians, and the EU. Paying little attention to any UN edicts. Never concerned with any sanction because of its patronage by the US.


I suspect the winds of change are coming to Washington, and the US will increasingly press Israel to make good with a just and fair solution for the Palestinians (self-determination, etc). I certainly would welcome this, and as I mentioned before, many Americans, including Jewish Americans are deeply critical of the abuses of Israel against Palestinians. This is true of many Jews in Israel. There was a burgeoning peace movement years ago that seemed capable of finding a resolution to this issue, but it seems to have waned. I believe the interest is still there, and Obama, if he is able to achieve success at home, may make this a priority as well.
...
written by hunh?, March 18, 2010
most of the responses here seem to try to justify support for Iran despite the brutal nature of this regime, by claiming that the US does the same with Israel. That is, the US overlooks the brutality of Israel. But I am not speaking for the US. No, I am against continued support for Israel unless they find a more just and fair solution for the Palestinians, that is, a homeland. What is pathetic about all these responses, is that they all try to justify one hypocrisy (supporting Iran) by pointing out another hypocrisy (the US support for Israel). Two wrongs don't make a right. Both are wrong, and most progressive people are speaking out against both of them. Yet, I read so many Brazilians defending their country and incapable of simply saying, this regime is brutal, repressive, torturing its own people, and this is wrong. Likewise, there is one substantial difference between the Israeli and Iranian regimes. the Israeli's have had nuclear arms for years, and they have never threatened to wipe another nation off the map as Iran has. And, L. Cata, your examples of poor intelligence by the US in the past seems lame, except for the case of Iraq, which was clearly a case of lies and deceit. Yet as I have said here before. It is not just the US, intelligence gathering agencies who are convinced that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, but the UN, as well as Russia, France, UK, and other investigative journalists from the Middle East. If you were refuting any of the multitude of stories amassing evidence about Iran's nuclear effort, then I would have more respect for your opinion, but you are just rehashing old news about the Cold War, and things from the past that are not relevant to contemporary Iran. You and many others here say nothing, absolutely nothing about the people being beaten and tortured by the Iranian regime. So i say you all sound like hypocrites. Of course the Palestinians are suffering, as are many others in the world, but the issue is about Lula befriending a tyrant who is torturing his people on a massive scale. The Iranians don't defend him so vehemently as Lula does. And why? Hundreds of millions of dollars of Petrobras investments? Does anyone mention this? and if the only evidence you can offer that A. of Iran is not developing nuclear weapons is because Lula "looked into his eyes", I say this is silly talk. You don't expect the world to gamble the existence of Israel or regional peace on Lula "looking into his eyes". And to the Clean Slate who peppered his response with many wonderful quotes of Ganhi and other beautiful souls, it is hypocrisy for you to quote Gandhi and others while ignoring the torture and murder of this repressive regime. Gandhi would speak out against justice in all forms. And if India was defending a tyrant, he would not just blindly defend India.

This story is about the "supersonic growth" and accession of Brazil. When Lula first came to power, I thought Brazil could offer a unique and compelling voice. Yet, I thought this would be a voice of justice, speaking out for the oppressed, as the great Brazilian scholar Paulo Freire may have done as the president. Yet, Lula and his party were mired in corruption from the beginning, and the majority of people supported him anyway, which showed me how deep corruption went in Brazil: ordinary Brazilians were not outraged that he would continue with the same corrupt practices. This bodes poorly for future change in Brazil. Like many others on the Left, I have grown disillusioned with Lula, and now his hugging this tyrant while the blood was still fresh in the streets of Tehran, is the last straw. Shame on Lula, and shame on any Brazilian that courts A.
I guess if you say it again and again, Brazilians will begin to think they are the next superpower as this story illustrates. While Brazil's economy is expanding as it should, it seems to have many problems that most people rarely talk honestly about here, including vast inequality of wealth, rampant poverty, crime, racism, environmental destruction, corruption, buearcracy, graft, etc. I think Brazil's greatest enemy is itself, and the hubris of Lula in trying to stage his own negotiations with Israel and A. rather than building a multi-lateral consensus, based on years of intelligence and attempted dialogue, as the UN along with US and other nations are trying to do, will only further tarnish Brazil's reputation. From the outside it looks to me that Brazil is trying so hard to assert that it's a "global leader" and it keeps throwing itself into various controversies trying hard to upstage the US. Yet, it seems transparent to me that Lula is trying to score points with the locals with cheap publicity stunts.
...
written by hunh?, March 18, 2010
This blog resembles a 24-hour, non-stop infomercial trying to convince Brazilians and the world that everything about Brazil is extraordinary.

To the authors of this silly trash: go back to school, get into some high quality journalism program, and not your typical "college" in Brazil where your rich daddy complains to the principal who threatens to fire the teacher if they don't give you an grade (mark) of A, even if you never opened the book to study. Try to cultivate a bit more detachment, and a critical perspective of your country: it would be the best gift you could offer to the democratic process. Who encourages the authors to write such stories? the Brazilian Chamber of Commerce?
hunh?
written by Lloyd Cata, March 18, 2010
I suspect the winds of change are coming to Washington, and the US will increasingly press Israel to make good with a just and fair solution for the Palestinians (self-determination, etc).

So, the 'Zionists' in the Israeli government who just backhanded and sucker-punched the US VP were just smoothing the way for the next round of BS that's been going on since Camp David. Yeah, I kinda understand perfectly...it was a diplomatic error and the settlements mean nothing.

There was a burgeoning peace movement years ago that seemed capable of finding a resolution to this issue, but it seems to have waned.

I refer you to Lula's own words on your assertions, but let's not forget what happened to the 'peacemaker' Rabin.

Lula - There was a moment in which I believed more in peace in the Middle East. If I remember correctly, in '93 we traveled to Tunis, met [Palestinian leader Yasser] Arafat, then went to Israel, spoke to [then Foreign Minister] Shimon Peres, to [then] prime minister [Yitzhak] Rabin. At that time I believed that peace was closer, that people were more open to discussing the matter..

your examples of poor intelligence by the US in the past seems lame, except for the case of Iraq, which was clearly a case of lies and deceit. Yet as I have said here before. It is not just the US, intelligence gathering agencies who are convinced that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, but the UN, as well as Russia, France, UK, and other investigative journalists from the Middle East. If you were refuting any of the multitude of stories amassing evidence about Iran's nuclear effort, then I would have more respect for your opinion,

At least you recognize that Iraq has been destroyed through lies and deceit, but where is all the other evidence that prompted Bush to remove the UN and proceed with invasion and occupation. Of course, the intelligence failures of Russian collapse, India and Pakistan going nuke were just 'insignificant'. You know, my parents taught me to say, "i don't know" when I don't know. You don't know Iran has nukes, I don't know Iran has nukes, and nobody else does either...but we 'know' Israel has nukes and refuses to account to anyone...but they are the 'most honorable' who kill and persecute Palestinians who are not supposed to count. Israel has been doing this before even the Iranian revolution, but for you anything is excusable for Zionists. I don't condone the 'recent' Iranian behavior, but as Iranians they have a better opportunity to change their condition than the Palestinians under Israel...no doubt!

but the issue is about Lula befriending a tyrant who is torturing his people on a massive scale. The Iranians don't defend him so vehemently as Lula does.

You, my friend, as some media, have a flair for misdirection and exaggeration. "Massive scale", let's see just what you call 'massive'. Would that be more or less than the children alone who have died in the Lebanese incursion(s) or the 'recent' Gaza massacre(please refer to your copious UN reports).Yet, again, I refer you to Lula's own words;

Lula - In fact, it is necessary, and I have already had the opportunity of discussing the matter with Iran: Iran cannot go on saying that it is going to destroy the State of Israel. I also said to [Iranian president Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad that it is inconceivable to deny the Holocaust. It existed and is encrusted in the minds of humanity, and the fact that you disagree with the State of Israel does not make it necessary to deny history, you may know history.

I have seen far more 'balance' in this forum than any other and that's why I participate. Perhaps your a fan of O Estado who are blasting Lula in this forum, but I disagree with them also, so your in excellent company for Zionist propaganda.

...
written by hunh?, March 18, 2010
Cata:
so your in excellent company for Zionist propaganda


such silly talk. I have spoken out repeatedly here against Israel's oppression of the Palestinians.
...
written by hunh?, March 18, 2010
Cata: why do you think the US did not anticipate the collapse of the USSR? Reagan ramped up the arms race with this explicit intention of bankrupting the USSR. US intelligence back in the 80s was reporting serious problems their that would lead to crisis in times. They don't have a crystal ball to read, but as far as change goes, US intelligence watched all along develop. Reagan (Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall) and others spoke out in support of all the reform parties in the satelite countries. It was the accident at Chernobyl that lead to a crisis among the people who no longer trusted their government. Predicting a nuclear accident like this is not within the realm of intelligence agencies, but following the possible outcome surely was on the radar, even if the collapse shocked us all ultimately.

But my complaint all along is not about Israel (which I have been critical of) nor the Iraq War (which I have been critical of) but the lack of criticism at this site when Lula befriends a brutal tyrant. People rant endlessly about the US supporting the dictatorship in Brazil, but they somehow find it acceptable for Lula to support an unpopular dictator. Don't you see the obvious hypocrisy here?????
...
written by hunh?, March 18, 2010
If you are going to speak out against repression in one place (Israel, Iraq), you have to speak out against it in all forms, and right now the Iranians are trying to overthrow this brutal regime that Lula and many Brazilians want to defend. How pathetic!

So many of the comments on this site redneck Americans who cannot hear anything critical of their government: you are just another version of blind jingoism supporting Lula and all things Brazilian. You seem utterly incapable of looking honestly at what is going on in Iran.
...
written by Double-Dot, March 18, 2010


Ah think Iran is about to invade Brazil with their nukes and mah recommendation to their President Chavez is get some fine F-18s to defend themselves.
...
written by Double-Dot, March 20, 2010
I think of myself being dickhe.ad

The definiton of hypocrisy and who is hypocrite
written by Clean Slate, March 21, 2010
This post is directed to poster nicknamed hunh:

I suppose, or better yet, I am convinced you read my posts from your singular point of view. That is to say that you read it and interpreted it as you wished, not as I wrote it. No doubt about it. I start reading your answer to a certain point, then I got tired of reading just another rant form somebody who certainly has never been to Brazil and ii) and of course, you don’t know me, Brazilians for their sake or my county. yet, you find yourself in position to rank our problems supposedly you do that from the massive knowledge and experience you have on the country, its people, values, etc)...yet put himself to judge my character. If this is what you call a counterargument, then it is me to send you to school where they can teach you how to analyse what is effectively written and not what your biased tendencies are up to (or can only) interpret.

I honestly stopped at your reading after your post calling Brazilians and me hypocrites. Why should I keep on reading a rant written with someone's guts? I don’t know you, so certainly I am not here to offend you, but your position points to someone who has nothing to contribute and, on the contrary, it is ready to disqualify, to criticise. By the way, the disqualifying the opponent is poor (but still effective) technique. Of course it does not work at higher levels of debate.

In rhetoric, a common there some strategies one can use to discredit the opponent, to make his arguments look vulnerable to the similar criticism being done. This is not a novelty to me. I laugh. These persons who resort to that make me laugh because I know that their best defence is the attack, in general moral attack. It is accepted from people of this kind.

Mr hunh, for your information, you your posts feel rather a series of trolls. It resembles posts from a conversation hacker. I pity you as it may not be aware of it (besides the fact that you misread intentionally my posts).

Don’t know what a troll is? If you are not paid to come online to use a pathological appeal (Pathos appeal from Aristotle - Ethos and Logos are the other ones, but you seem to use and abuse of pathos). However, there is always a chance that you really may not know what a troll is, in this case read this great article on it: liviers-blog&Itemid=34'>http://www.cognitionandculture.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=559:conversation-hackers-trolls-argumentation&catid=32smilies/shocked.gifliviers-blog&Itemid=34

Have a nice day and hopefully visit Brazil and know Brazilian in close up. Not thought the media. You might be surprised...if you can be surprised.smilies/wink.gif

This is for you and other like-mindedsmilies/wink.gif"Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof" John Kenneth Galbraith
...
written by Clean Slate, March 21, 2010
To hunh,

If you were really just and if (ONLY IF) you could read in Portuguese, you perhaps (who knows? you seem to have a predetermined idea of what Brazil and Brazilians are, thin, say, etc)

Anyway, if you were really that able, you perhaps would have a chance to read what Brazilian bloggers, political scientists, people who adamantly criticised Lula's position regarding Honduras, Cuba (not just the most recent case) the conflict on Israel-Palestine itself...how our diplomacy for so long well regarded has been overturned. The problem is, Mr hunh, to analyse all the intricacies of our domestic politics you should have a some bare knowledge on what is going on here, something that clearly you have no clue whatsoever. You write and read with your guts. What a pity!

Please, I beg you; refrain from talking on what you don’t know. Defend a point of view, of course, but do that based on solid, clear, objective arguments. Do a favour to yourself and your comments will be sounder. So far...

If you only could read in Portuguese...though I question how much good this would make since you seem to be convinced of your beliefs...then, reading in any language would be to no avail, specially if your vision of the situation remains the same. It is a pitiful situation.
...
written by Andrade, March 21, 2010

Please, I beg you; refrain from talking on what you don’t know. Defend a point of view, of course, but do that based on solid, clear, objective arguments. Do a favour to yourself and your comments will be sounder.


You are wasting your time in begging him. He is an one issue man. What we call micro gerente.
...
written by hunh?, March 28, 2010
Clean Slate: For what it is worth, I lived in Brazil for 2.5 years and that was about all I could bare. Despite whatever critical comments say here, I only wish the best to Brazil and all humanity. I can only give my thoughts and opinion here. I saw much hypocrisy while in Brazil. I mean no offense to you or anyone else to name it. Despite all the malice I read here against the US, I don't see Brazil in any way offering a moral vision any greater. Yet, I hear much hubris and boasting about what an extraordinary nation it is. Not what i saw and lived. I don't want to hold one nation or people above another. Hopefully the day will come when we will have all evolved and learned to live together more harmoniously, with compassion in our heart for all. Until that day, peace be with you.
MR
written by Fergie, April 05, 2010
If Brazil wants to become a great power this country will have to have a lot of money to give away. This country will have to raise the educational level of its people to compete in this world of high technology. The blacks in Brazil make up fifty percent of this country population and only one percent of this country college graduates. This is a country where many people still live in cardboard boxes that the rain wash them down the mountains every years. I think the author is full of wishful thinking to write an article like this because Brazil is not there yet.
Makers and Fakers
written by Becktemba, April 22, 2010
One day Brazil will be a super power, but not until it empowers its own people. Brazil is blessed with natural resources, without which, it would not be considered a world player. The U.S. as acquired its position by being a maker. A maker of technology, telephone, car, computer, internet, cell phone...etc.. a maker in history, World War I and II, A decision maker, Cold War. The U.S. has shed its own blood for its ideas. All of these made things had to due with people and what they created using their God given talents. Brazilians have the same potential to become makers, many of them that come to the United States become makers because they are given the opportunity. Not so in Brazil. Many Brazilians are Fakers. Standing on the sidelines criticizing the best players on the field without playing themselves. Until Brazil is willing to make the hard decisions of being an actual leader it will never be a Super Power. My goodness do you want the rest of the world to get along the way a majority the Brazilian people do? Get real.

Write comment

security code
Write the displayed characters


busy
 
Joomla 1.5 Templates by Joomlashack