and now.... Honduras.

[Neil]

Fortunately, he wasn't actually the president anymore.  The positions taken by the other American states seem mainly to be founded in a desire to create another left-wind dictator (Venezuala) or profound ignorance (the US).

Do you really think there was "profound ignorance" on the part of the US, or do you think the US is responding with the aim of taking the air out of the balloon of the left wing blame everything on the CIA crowd?

Do you think that their reaction can successfully do that?  The left-wing, blame-the-CIA crowd isn't responsive to facts or logic.

[Admiral Yi]

No comprendo.

Opponents of the US such as Chavez get "I'm not here to lecture."  Allies of the US such as Israel and Karzai get lectures.

[Valmy]

Opponents of the US such as Chavez get "I'm not here to lecture."  Allies of the US such as Israel and Karzai get lectures.

The best way to handle people like Chavez is ignore them as completely as possible.

Israel seems to do whatever they feel they must.  We make suggestions and they pretty much do whatever it is they think it is best for themselves and we rarely protest too much.

As for Karzai...well that is different since our soldiers are defending his government.  We kind of have a stake (and influence) in what he does we don't have with the Iranians and Chavez so why should we waste our breath?

[alfred russel]

Fortunately, he wasn't actually the president anymore.  The positions taken by the other American states seem mainly to be founded in a desire to create another left-wind dictator (Venezuala) or profound ignorance (the US).

Do you really think there was "profound ignorance" on the part of the US, or do you think the US is responding with the aim of taking the air out of the balloon of the left wing blame everything on the CIA crowd?

Do you think that their reaction can successfully do that?  The left-wing, blame-the-CIA crowd isn't responsive to facts or logic.

But it makes them look stupid if they still want to blame us.

[Valmy]

But it makes them look stupid if they still want to blame us.

Since when do they care about that?

[alfred russel]

No comprendo.

Opponents of the US such as Chavez get "I'm not here to lecture."  Allies of the US such as Israel and Karzai get lectures.

We have leverage over Israel and Karzai. If we want to lecture them they have to listen and in some cases respond. What good can come from lecturing people like Chavez that make their career based on fighting wars of words against the US?

[The Larch]

An agreement of any kind is reached between all parts. No need to have Zelaya return to office, I doubt it could be even possible anyway.

You're granting Zelaya veto over Honduran membership in the OAS.

Apparently the interim government left it anyway before the expulsion vote was held, so that doesn't seem to matter a lot to them. It may be a "You're not kicking us out, we're leaving!" kind of answer, but anyway, they don't seem to care much about the OAS.

[alfred russel]

But it makes them look stupid if they still want to blame us.

Since when do they care about that?

Chavez is (theoretically) trying to spark a Latin American movement. The dumber he looks, the less traction his anti american rhetoric is going to get.

[viper37]

However, I guess it can be argued that the courts should have waited, that the referendum was just being proposed for voting, and not being implemented. But if such an unlawful referendum is allowed, it could probably be argued that it sets a dangerous course and one that would be more problematic.

as per the Constitution, the army is in charge of safekeeping the voting boxes. 
The President wanted a referendum and the Court said no (as weel as the Congress).
Zelaya ordered the army to participate in the referendum, the Supreme Court said no, the army obeyed the court, the President fired the Chief of the army, wich the court then ordered reinstated.
The President then marched to the base with his supporters to get back the boxes, and succeeded as the army was not in a mood to fire on the civilians.

Following that, was there any doubt the guy would use any means to maintain his power?  Was there really any choice left for the Court to order its destitution?

I don't think so.

@Larch:
non binding or not is irrelevant.  The Supreme Court, in charge of interpreting the Constitution said it was illegal, therefore it is. 
That's what happens in democratic countries with working justice system, you take your chance to the court, but once it has reached its decision, you either abide by it or you suffer the consequences.
IIRC, the Constitution can be changed by 2/3 vote of the Congress, except for the articles wich can't be changed.

The guy was simply trying to grab power, the way his friend Chavez did.  US&Canada, among others are trying to appease Chavez by declaring it illegal, but I just don't see how we can disregard court decisions of other countries juste because we don't like it.

[jimmy olsen]

Fortunately, he wasn't actually the president anymore.  The positions taken by the other American states seem mainly to be founded in a desire to create another left-wind dictator (Venezuala) or profound ignorance (the US).

Do you really think there was "profound ignorance" on the part of the US, or do you think the US is responding with the aim of taking the air out of the balloon of the left wing blame everything on the CIA crowd?

Do you think that their reaction can successfully do that?  The left-wing, blame-the-CIA crowd isn't responsive to facts or logic.

But it makes them look stupid if they still want to blame us.

They've always looked stupid and that never stopped them before.

[viper37]

The best way to handle people like Chavez is ignore them as completely as possible.

that's not really reasonable when the guy is trying to extend his influence and perveting democracy outside his borders.

[The Larch]

@Larch:
non binding or not is irrelevant.  The Supreme Court, in charge of interpreting the Constitution said it was illegal, therefore it is. 
That's what happens in democratic countries with working justice system, you take your chance to the court, but once it has reached its decision, you either abide by it or you suffer the consequences.
IIRC, the Constitution can be changed by 2/3 vote of the Congress, except for the articles wich can't be changed.

The guy was simply trying to grab power, the way his friend Chavez did.  US&Canada, among others are trying to appease Chavez by declaring it illegal, but I just don't see how we can disregard court decisions of other countries juste because we don't like it.

I don't dissagree that the whole referendum issue stank to high Heaven, what I dissagree with is with the execution of the whole affair.

[Valmy]

that's not really reasonable when the guy is trying to extend his influence and perveting democracy outside his borders.

Fortunately for us Chavez is an inept idiot who will dig his own grave.  No reason to interrupt him ruining his prospects.

[viper37]

I don't dissagree that the whole referendum issue stank to high Heaven, what I dissagree with is with the execution of the whole affair.

Ok, but what real, practical choice did they have?  What happens once they arrest him and send him to jail?  Nicaragua is moving troops to the border, Venezuala and others are threatening to use force to reinstate Zelaya.

Out of the country, he can't be put back on the throne.  In the country, he is a danger do democracy.

I see as the same kind of action that leads countries like the UK&Canada to remove the passport and expel citizens who preach hate against the West.  These people are judged to be too dangerous to be kept on national soil.  Why can't it be the same with a former President?

[viper37]

Fortunately for us Chavez is an inept idiot who will dig his own grave.  No reason to interrupt him ruining his prospects.

I do not share your optimism.