Stupid World

[Viking01]

Well they are the biggest importer of their oil. T'would be a pain if Russia or China or some other country decided that it wanted the oil instead.

Morning.

The following online article will probably answer most of your question.

https://eurasiafuture.com/2019/01/26...total-exports/

Plus the fact that all Venezuelan oil production could, over time, then be
privatised and sold off (to US oil companies, say), and then they would
enjoy all the profit margin from wellhead through to petrol pump.



" T'would be a pain if Russia or China or some other country decided that it wanted the oil instead."

Why ?

[TheDemonLord]

Dumb fucks will probably confuse the two. They're already saying the things so I see no reason to advocate for their ability to say them. What you see as my lack, and your virtue, in such an area is just some shit you wish to see.

And what happens when someone/something else infringes on their ability to say things - that's the part you are conveniently leaving out. I'm just here pointing out the Hypocrisy - You cry 'Free Speech' when it's a message you agree with and then stand idly by with glee when the censor turns on a message you don't agree with.

You can't have it both ways. Either you support Free Speech and are therefore duty-bound to support even the most detestable people, or you don't.

Pick one.

There was no need to use the terms 'existing concept' and 'twisted parody', that you did, shows your bias; so I asked you to try it again.

Masculinity existed as a concept well before Feminism.
What Feminism is trying to portray as the ideal of Masculinity is a Twisted Parody.

This is not Bias, this is an objective fact.

Wrong, my claim was always a relative one, to dispute it you have to show the relative, not an absolute. Like showing how your beliefs are profitable in a similar scenario. Where are the profitable ads saying women should not be prime minister? for example...

And I did show the Relative - all of them lost money, all of them had pre-existing franchises that were profitable. The relativity is the value before and after Social Justice. And in all cases, it's clearly not as popular. Therefore your claim is objectively wrong.

But since you want me to show how my Beliefs are profitable in a similar scenario: What's the highest grossing film of 2018? That would be Avengers: Infinity War - which (among other things) features a number of characters who are all Archetypes of traditional Masculinity... so...

And nice Strawman - try again.

[mashman]

Morning.

The following online article will probably answer most of your question.

https://eurasiafuture.com/2019/01/26...total-exports/

Plus the fact that all Venezuelan oil production could, over time, then be
privatised and sold off (to US oil companies, say), and then they would
enjoy all the profit margin from wellhead through to petrol pump.



" T'would be a pain if Russia or China or some other country decided that it wanted the oil instead."

Why ?

Hola

That certainly adds a little extra flavour. Sanction and embargo are powerful tools when you wish to make "things" cheaper in a country for incoming US business to expand into. It's nothing that we haven't seen before though. Bummer that those who wish change to happen also happen to be the "responsible" for the "wealth" Venezuelan economy.

In regards to your Why. Nothing complicated... Venezuela need money no matter who is in charge, and Russia and China are probably the only 2 countries with strong enough economies to potentially soak up that oil.

[Katman]

You can't have it both ways. Either you support Free Speech and are therefore duty-bound to support even the most detestable people, or you don't.

That's an interesting choice of words from you.

Do you support the right of people to voice their concerns about vaccines?

[TheDemonLord]

That's an interesting choice of words from you.

Do you support the right of people to voice their concerns about vaccines?

Have I ever called for the censuring of you or any member who posts anti-vax material? Have I ever asked the Mods to delete posts or restrict your freedoms in anyway?

I've compared the spreading of demonstrably false information by activists with no Medical training with Incitement to Violence - and on that specific scenario - I would consider the possibility of legal action being taken against them, in-line with my opinion that there is a clear equivalency: Both scenarios involve someone using words, to encourage a listener to do something that could result in harm to an innocent third party.

I've on multiple occassions agreed that on some points, proper research is warranted and should be conducted.

Does that answer your question?

[Katman]

Does that answer your question?

Well that depends.....

Is your answer "yes, I support the right of people to voice their concerns about vaccines"?

[Viking01]

Hola

That certainly adds a little extra flavour. Sanction and embargo are powerful tools when you wish to make "things" cheaper in a country for incoming US business to expand into. It's nothing that we haven't seen before though. Bummer that those who wish change to happen also happen to be the "responsible" for the "wealth" Venezuelan economy.

In regards to your Why. Nothing complicated... Venezuela need money no matter who is in charge, and Russia and China are probably the only 2 countries with strong enough economies to potentially soak up that oil.

Thanks for the reply. And you're correct about Venezuela badly needing oil income.

Background

It's always hard to find articles that simply deliver "facts on the ground" without
either a capitalist or a socialist spin. And the following article is no exception.

But the first part of the article is useful in that it does provide a short "canned"
history of some of the underlying politics of this nation the past 60 years, and so
provide some background:

https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/08/th...vs-propaganda/

Note: In case anyone wants to get into a debate on the relative merits of socialist or
capitalist systems, save your breath. I'm not interested .... 8-)


Russian and Chinese "Meddling"
Russia

Venezuela's state-run oil company, Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), owns the U.S. company
and Houston-based Citgo. In December 2016, PDVSA put up a large stake (49.9 percent) in
Citgo as collateral in exchange for a loan from Rosneft.

As a result, Rosneft, Russia’s largest petroleum company, could theoretically seize Citgo
refineries and gas stations in the US that it holds as collateral in case Citgo defaults
on its loans.

China
Prior to 2016, China had extended loans to Venezuela.

In 2016, China extended a grace period to Venezuela for its own loans to the country but
it could demand, under the terms of the deal, that nearly a quarter of all Venezuelan oil
exports go to China.

In 2018, it chose to extend its level of investment:

https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201...-us-venezuela/

CitGo

The economic sanction that prohibits Citgo from remitting profits to Venezuela means that
the Venezuelan government is losing access to approximately US$1 billion a year.

But in addition to that, the sanctions also stipulate that Venezuela practically cannot
refinance its foreign debt, which is something logical that any country facing a difficult
economic situation would probably do.

The US sanctions prohibit all US financial institutions from having any transaction, any
interaction with the Venezuelan government and PDVSA.

And when you read the following article, you can see the US action is essentially a "two
for one" (help bring about regime change whilst dealing to your two strongest economic
competitors in the region).

https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nat...225240320.html

[mashman]

Thanks for the reply. And you're correct about Venezuela badly needing oil income.
...........................................

That Russia shareholding made me giggle a little. Tis amusing how a minority of nations can decide that the president of another country isn't actually the president and that somehow international law must just accept it. Ah the old games they play. Bye bye Petro.

[TheDemonLord]

Well that depends.....

Is your answer "yes, I support the right of people to voice their concerns about vaccines"?

What's it you say?

Ah yes...

"Fuck off and read post #10265"

[Graystone]

And what happens when someone/something else infringes on their ability to say things - that's the part you are conveniently leaving out. I'm just here pointing out the Hypocrisy - You cry 'Free Speech' when it's a message you agree with and then stand idly by with glee when the censor turns on a message you don't agree with.

You can't have it both ways. Either you support Free Speech and are therefore duty-bound to support even the most detestable people, or you don't.

Pick one.



Masculinity existed as a concept well before Feminism.
What Feminism is trying to portray as the ideal of Masculinity is a Twisted Parody.

This is not Bias, this is an objective fact.



And I did show the Relative - all of them lost money, all of them had pre-existing franchises that were profitable. The relativity is the value before and after Social Justice. And in all cases, it's clearly not as popular. Therefore your claim is objectively wrong.

But since you want me to show how my Beliefs are profitable in a similar scenario: What's the highest grossing film of 2018? That would be Avengers: Infinity War - which (among other things) features a number of characters who are all Archetypes of traditional Masculinity... so...

And nice Strawman - try again.

'Cry' free speech? You asked me what gave them the right to say it, and I informed you that it was free speech. Take this gish gallop you're trying to pull off and shove it up your arse mate. There is no hypocrisy or things I'm leaving out, just bluster and bullshit you are trying to add as usual.

What twisted parody? Different people simply have different views on what 'being the best a man can be' (attempt at bait an switch for the term 'masculinity' is noted). That is your view, do not try to put it forward as objective fact.

Relative to yours. Infinity war example is bullshit, plenty of strong female characters in that as well. Try again...

[Katman]

What's it you say?

Ah yes...

"Fuck off and read post #10265"

Post #10265 is simply you avoiding giving an answer that could be used against you.

So do you support the right of people to voice their concerns about vaccines or not?

[Graystone]

Have I ever called for the censuring of you or any member who posts anti-vax material? Have I ever asked the Mods to delete posts or restrict your freedoms in anyway?

Have I done the same for the causes as above?

Like Katman says, pretty interesting choice of words from you considering you intolerance towards antivaccers... but I guess double standards have always been fine if it's you that holds them right...

[avgas]

Viva! Vaccinate Venezuela Voices!

It's funny because my wife works in banking stuff and PDVSA are always a hot ticket. I can't imagine a saction against an oil company is ever an intelligent move - But then again 'MERICA!
I had to explain to my dearest that sanctions are a silly thing the USA invented. We told the world to follow suit because otherwise they couldn't come to the UN pool party. Suckers.

[TheDemonLord]

'Cry' free speech? You asked me what gave them the right to say it, and I informed you that it was free speech. Take this gish gallop you're trying to pull off and shove it up your arse mate. There is no hypocrisy or things I'm leaving out, just bluster and bullshit you are trying to add as usual.

You're defence is to cite their right to say it.
A right that you curiously fail to defend when people say things you don't like.

You only support Free Speech when it's your side doing the Speaking.

What twisted parody? Different people simply have different views on what 'being the best a man can be' (attempt at bait an switch for the term 'masculinity' is noted). That is your view, do not try to put it forward as objective fact.

Yes: The Majority of Men have a clear understanding of what Masculinity is and as the majority, they get to decide on the definition.
a Small (15% of the female population, less than 10% of the male) have a different view of Masculinity (this would be the Twisted Parody).

This IS an objective fact. As evidenced by the utter rejection by the Majority everytime this is tried.

Relative to yours. Infinity war example is bullshit, plenty of strong female characters in that as well. Try again...

Who is the Main Character in Infinity Wars? It's not Black Widow, It's not Gamora, It's not the Children of Thanos. I'd put the Main Characters as Thanos, followed by Thor, Tony Stark and Steve Rogers.

Not to mention that those 'strong Female characters' are "all Archetypes of traditional Masculinity" - so, doesn't *really* count. The last Female action hero that was a Female Archetype was Ripley.

[TheDemonLord]

Post #10265 is simply you avoiding giving an answer that could be used against you.

So do you support the right of people to voice their concerns about vaccines or not?

No, it's outlining a series of principles. If you are too stupid to understand the answer and what it means, then that's not my issue. If you are intent on deliberately misinterpreting it in order to claim some faux-moral victory, then that's also not my issue.

Have I done the same for the causes as above?

Yes:

i.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/106898701/twitter-permanently-bans

The system works!

and

The most 'detail' you provided in that was the banning of one muppet but not another...

The system works because Alex was banned for his drivelous and hate filling invective

Like Katman says, pretty interesting choice of words from you considering you intolerance towards antivaccers... but I guess double standards have always been fine if it's you that holds them right...

Where is the Double Standard? If you are trying to strawman me as a Free Speech Absolutist, then it would be - but I've maintained on multiple occassions that things such as incitement to violence are not covered under Free Speech. I've then outlined what the rationale behind our current incitement to... laws are and why I consider certain types of anti-vax activism to fall under that banner.