Wonder when we get to kill the Senate in self-defense
Bolivia's Jenine Áñez finally allows election effectively at gunpoint, loses and is going to jail
- Thread starter crimson5pheonix
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Well, this is complete nonsense. I have never cried in here about being a victim of prejudice. I dispute the characterization as mass execution, you are just blindly taking the word of a highly politically motivated group that is using these events to imprison their opponents. Step back bit, please.
I feel like if you had a point, MAS wouldn't have gotten elected back overwhelmingly. Judging from how the locals reacted, there's a good chance the coup government's excuse is a load of bullshit. And appropriately, they're going to face the consequences of their actions.
Ideally we should look at that as an inspiration for what should be done in the US.
Oh my God, you don't do anything else other than to call any life experience that is not a perfect match with your own a lie.
Oh, heavens! The slaves aren't harvesting the food for us!
Like my reply sounds joking I'm sure and can be taken multiple ways, but I'm honestly so appalled that delay of these services is ground for death in tstorm's eyes
(I have issues with the Senate on that level too but just also general corruption ones)
If Trump were asking for a third or extra term you guys would go bananas, but since socialist Morales is, that's okay because he cares about people when he just cares about power and would roll tanks over people's heads if he could get away with it.
citation that he'd roll tanks over people's heads?
Quick preemption: ranting about antifa wanting to burn your house isn't a citation he'd roll tanks over people's heads
Term limits were introduced in the United States because Republicans shit themselves about the idea of another FDR.
Out of interest, is anyone here actually concerned about term limits?
Sure, if Trump got more terms by cheating or whatever, but that's a cheating thing, not a term limit thing.
I'm not a huge fan of despotism, but I'm also not a huge fan of military coups overthrowing the popular vote. And to be honest, the results of what happened subsequently speak for themselves.
If he actually managed to get the 22nd (I think that's the right amendment) revoked or changed I'd probably accept it, though I would be highly critical of him for doing so seeing as I believe him to be an incompetent moron who has no place anywhere near a seat of power.
If he managed to find a good legal argument I'd probably also accept it though it would have to be pretty ironclad (Still the caveat of him being a moron).
It's not "grounds for death". They weren't executed. They picked a fight with a police caravan, and then we don't know what actually happened. You're choosing for whatever reason to believe the armed escort went "hey look, a different race of people. Anez told us to murder all of them." And then they only got a few cause they're really bad shots or something. They were active participants in a battle, that's not genocide.
Genocide is a very loose definition, which can be very well used in this scenario, despite your misgivings.
You're critiquing our lack of information... whilst simultaneously taking the story given by the force that did the killing, and uncritically running with it as the truth.
The force that did the killing claims they didn't fire a single bullet. They're liars too.
But the people who did the shooting and are claiming they didn't aren't even the people being put on trial. They're not going after the police or soldiers. It's the people who tried to keep the nation from collapsing into anarchy that are being tried for genocide. The leadership that only got there because the MAS leadership all abdicated when Morales was out, and was immediately put in a position where the people who just fled the country were organizing a blockade to starve the capital city.
Again, this is uncritically parroting the line put out by the coup government. Several members of MAS were heavily pressured or threatened to step down, until the line of succession passed to someone from a party that neither won the election nor even came second or third.
Just imagine if that were the case in the USA, for a moment: say the Republicans or the Democrats won, then a shady audit concluded the vote was flawed, leading to violent unrest... and then after internal military intervention, the government you ended up with was from some fringe dingbats like the Constitution Party.
As-fucking-if anybody would just accept that the only available caretaker government wasn't from any of the successful parties. You'd see enormous protest if that happened in the US, and rightly so. But somehow, I suspect the usual voices wouldn't be defending the right of the coup government to gun them down to keep the supply lines open, and blaming the protesters for getting in the way.
Last edited:
We don't know what happened, thus you defend their deaths and tell us they were active participants in a battle.
I also said nothing of the sort, I'm just commenting that you said the protestors were trying to kill people then followed up that claim by saying they were blocking resources from entering.