BruceVC

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/africa/south-africa-voices-concern-over-iran-unrest-urges-parties-to-show-restraint/3800247 The SA government has finally made a statement about the Iran crackdown. Its days late but at least they said something " South Africa said on Thursday it was monitoring the protests in Iran with concern, urging all parties to exercise “maximum” restraint. “Sustainable peace and stability can only be achieved through solutions that center the agency of the Iranian people,” a Foreign Ministry statement said. Pretoria called on Iranian authorities to guarantee citizens’ right to peaceful protest, responding to “concerning” reports of unrest and fatalities. The ministry stressed that South Africa considers the rights to peaceful protest, freedom of expression, and freedom of association as universal human rights that “must be upheld without exception.”

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2026/01/iran-massacre-of-protesters-demands-global-diplomatic-action-to-signal-an-end-to-impunity/ As predicted Iran has unleashed the full might of its security forces to crush the protests, total deaths are anything from 3k-10k but because of the Internet and information blackout we will never know total deaths And as expected South Africa has a completely inconsistent stance on this latest crackdown. We have failed to unequivocally condemn Iran, there is a deafening silence around what should be the foundation of our foreign policy According to our foreign affairs our foreign policy decisions are based on "human rights and Constitutionalism " So the reason we took a position on countries like Venezuela and Israel is because of this And yet its amazing listening to the mental gymnastics of some people on talk-shows trying to justify why we cant condemn whats happening in Iran, the excuses range from " we shouldn't get involved in the affairs of other countries " to " but Iran is just trying to survive and they have a siege mentality because of years of Western sanctions " None of that matters if the foundation of your foreign policy decisions is based on human rights The DA has demanded that the ANC take Iran to the UN Human Rights Council but I doubt we will see that happening. That type of outrage and global action only applies to Western countries or Israel and BRICS countries get a pass when they flagrantly and egregiously ignore human rights https://www.polity.org.za/article/da-asks-lamola-to-report-iran-for-human-rights-abuses-2026-01-14 "In a letter written to Lamola, the DA said the use of blatantly deadly oppression against civilians by a sitting government is one of the “most egregious forms of human rights abuse witnessed anywhere in the world” with the party questioning South Africa’s relationship with the country. DA spokesperson on International Relations and Cooperation Ryan Smith said the principles of freedom, democracy and human rights enshrined in the South African Constitution compels Lamola to execute his sworn duty, as the custodian of the country’s foreign policy, to protect global citizens against autocratic regimes. Smith said the UNHRC was the “ideal” international forum where South African foreign policy, rooted in the Constitution, could find expression on the international stage. He said as a member of the Government of National Unity (GNU), the DA would not tolerate South Africa “turning a blind eye to brutal authoritarian regimes at the African National Congress’s (ANC’s) behest”.

I had a chat with some of my family last night about this and they agree with you and @Lexx They also support what the Clintons are doing because they believe its just a way to create a distraction from Trumps involvement so the entire inquiry is insincere

Maybe but end of the day isnt it better for Bill Clinton to clarify why Epstein visited him in the WH 17 times and why he flew on Epstein's private plane 27 times? https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/bill-hillary-clinton-refuse-testify-house-epstein-probe-2026-01-13/ I dont think Clinton is guilty of anything but is it really unreasonable to expect him to answer questions? Even if it is a witch-hunt they cant charge him with something he didnt do And these same questions should be asked to everyone, including Trump Thats what this whole thing is suppose to be about, getting clarity on what people did or didnt know

I see the Clintons have refused to testify, I wonder why? I have read all there legal reasons but its not very convincing considering all the attention on Epstein https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/13/bill-hillary-clinton-epstein-investigation

It depends on what you mean by "dangers" and how it impacts you on the geopolitical level and also what specific dangers you concerned about that Trump has created We were living in a world already where countries like Russia can illegally annex parts of other countries and invade countries and yet the world still continues If you just very disappointed with the US under Trump thats understandable and especially if you a supporter of the US and what defines Democracy But if you can be more specific that would be helpful?

You definitely should see cheaper coffee These types of trade deals have a bad reputation because they sometimes dont include protectionism for local industries. For example when South Africa joined BRICS we were told it was going to create this " massive " benefit for our economy but because there have never been any clauses or ideas around how to protect our local industries its ended up with a R253 billion trade deficit with BRICS that is only increasing https://dailyinvestor.com/south-africa/93948/sa-has-a-trade-surplus-of-r37-billion-with-the-us-and-a-trade-deficit-of-r253-billion-with-brics/ But you can see how this Mercosur\EU deal has some clever safeguards built into the agreement and this is how these types of trade deals need to be created " Europe worked hard to reach consensus on how to assuage doubts from European farmers about any negative impacts on their livelihoods. The additional measures added to the deal include “safeguards” for sensitive agricultural sectors, such as poultry, beef, eggs, citrus, and sugar, which would “suspend tariff preferences” in the case of “serious injury” to EU farmers. Serious injury is defined as an increase in import volume or a decrease in prices by more than 8 percent compared to the three-year average. The European Commission also introduced a slew of regular monitoring instruments, which will have to report to the European Council and European Parliament for increased accountability on enforcement. The Commission will be able to suspend imports from Mercosur in sensitive sectors if it deems this to be necessary. The final concessions agreed this week to bring Italy on board also include a revision to the 2028-2034 EU budget to allow farmers early access to roughly €45 billion in subsidies, as well as lowering import duties on fertilizers, the unaffordability of which was a major sticking point for protesters."

Yes, its good that the EU doesnt rely on the US or China too much and these trade deals are a good step in that direction And if you read the link there is protection around safeguards for EU farmers if cheap imported goods start hurting the domestic EU market

It doesn't matter, the Iranian hardliners will do the same thing they do in every protest where Iranian citizens want a better life and expect there government to respect human rights They shutdown the Internet so state atrocities are less visible, they will arrest thousands of people and execute many of them and they will kill dozens of people. The protests will be crushed as usual using maximum force Then after several weeks it will go back to the normal BRICS and Iranian state media propaganda " Iran is a country that respects human rights and believes in peace " The normal story sadly repeated every few years in the repressive reality of Iran under its current leadership

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/dispatches/eu-and-mercosur-are-creating-one-of-the-worlds-largest-free-trade-areas/#:~:text=The agreement removes most Mercosur,percent) will also be removed. I see the Mercosur\EU trade deal has finally been implemented It has enormous trade potential for both the EU and the South American countries involved I understand the concerns about cheap goods but reduced tariffs can help both sides @Lexx @Elerond @majestic @Gorgon @Gorgon and other EU members Any opinion, do you support it?

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/cuba/article314223925.html Here is a link around how the Cubans failed to protect Maduro and why they were involved @rjshae you will also find this interesting

Yes it was common knowledge and reported on that 32 Cubans were killed, it hasn't featured much in South Africa coverage but its out there My interest is more what it means and why Maduro was using them. It was generally believed that Maduro always had the support of his own security forces. So why would you have foreign fighters as personal bodyguards if you trust your own military? I can just imagine the understandable outrage if our government was using foreign soldiers from any African country because all the questions would be " why dont you trust our own security forces" I believe the US had help from within the Venezuelan security forces, thats why the extraction was so easy. At least from an information gathering perspective We wont know until much later the full details And the movie about this is going to be very entertaining

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/republican-leaders-push-back-trump-openness-military-greenland-rcna252814 As expected Republican Leaders in both the House and Senate have rejected suggestions that the US will invade Greenland and take it by military force. The likely option is the US will make an offer to buy Greenland and that will be decided by the people in Greenland through a referendum " Top Republicans on Capitol Hill, including leaders of the House and the Senate, are pushing back against President Donald Trump on Greenland, saying it would be inappropriate for the United States to use military force to take over the Arctic island. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said Tuesday night he did not think it would be “appropriate” for the U.S. to use military action to acquire Greenland, a semi-autonomous territory controlled by Denmark, a founding member of NATO. On Wednesday morning, Johnson told reporters he did not think “anybody’s seriously considering that." Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., also rejected the idea, telling reporters Tuesday he does not see “military action being an option" in Greenland. “That, to me, is that’s not something that anybody is contemplating seriously at this point,” he said."

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0mkwl2g499o Venezuela has started releasing political prisoners, this is positive outcome now that Maduro is gone "The Venezuelan government has begun releasing detainees considered political prisoners by human rights groups, in what officials described as a goodwill gesture. Spain's foreign ministry said five of its nationals, including one dual national, had been released. Among them is thought to be rights activist Rocío San Miguel. The move comes after the US seized Venezuela's President Nicolás Maduro in a lightning raid on the capital, Caracas, on Saturday, to face drug trafficking charges in New York. The release of political prisoners in Venezuela has been a long-held US demand, especially during moments of heightened repression around elections or protests." Also something else that doesn't get much attention, 32 Cubans were killed protecting Maduro Why would any president need foreign fighters as bodyguards and how common is this? https://apnews.com/article/cubans-killed-venezuela-strike-us-oas-a8d8fcbe3e825979c5d3171f9b076a85

Yes, its a terrible outcome and people have every right to be angry and aggrieved We have spoken about this before, ICE is far to heavy handed and militant in there objective of deporting illegals Midterms will be the final judge on there behavior because its unlikely Trump will change course until then

Its not the scripting thats cringe, its the fact you claim to be so triggered on an Internet Forum like this that you feel the need to use one This forum has rules and no one really gets insulted on a personal level or is allowed to make really offensive comments If you cant handle someones opinion on this forum you should learn conflict resolution because you wont cope in RL

Its funny you mention that because I have just had a debate disputing that framing of SA on Codex But I dont get triggered by those types of mischaracterizations, Im not emotional about it The reality is I have no issue with someone calling SA a ****hole country if they clarify what is there definition of a ****hole country and the reason must be true. Because then its there opinion and it must be consistent for other countries. In this case they were saying that because of "white genocide " and there is no white genocide in SA I dont consider SA a ****hole country but we do have serious problems. I wouldnt live here if I thought that

Bartie is such a drama queen, I remember years ago he wrote a script so he " didnt have to read my posts " Can you imagine being so triggered by someones posts on a forum you actually spend time creating a script The obvious or typical solution is just dont read the persons posts or ignore them, problem solved

How you guys doing with the protests? I see its all about latest pressure on the economy?

Thank you for responding, this is the type of comment I am interested in My original question seems to have been misunderstood with people thinking Im trolling and I have to take some responsibility for that for not clarifying what I meant which I thought I did I used Maduro as an example because we discussing Venezuela but that doesn't mean if you say " Maduro isnt a legitimate leader " you now support how the US removed him around regime change These are 2 separate points. My question was about the broader reality of what defines legitimacy\Democracy and for me that requires a free and fair election in any country that calls itself a Democracy But a legitimate Democracy or leader can fail to deliver on policies and running the country properly but then you vote him out in the next election Thats how it should work in any real Democracy But I understand what you saying around "in the sense of being legal in the context of that nation's judicial system " so the word legitimacy becomes difficult to define So yes, its probably better to say " can you claim to be a Democracy "

Firstly I support Ramaphosa on several decisions and he is the legitimate leader of South Africa because we have free and fair elections I dont support parts of our foreign policy because its inconsistent and selective with what we say we stand for. But thats not the same thing as saying I dont support what the government and now the GNU believes in around all foreign policy decisions. So it depends on what part of foreign policy we talking about. Two things can be true at the same time and political support is not a binary reality. You can criticize and support the same politicians and parties for different reasons Ramaphosa has been very good around domestic policies, he is more or less consistent with what the Constitution says and he respects the judiciary. He is a Constitutionalist and thats important to me Overall I have a more positive view of him than a negative view , next time dont jump to conclusions. Ask me and I will respond And then you very confused about my opinion of Marikana and we have discussed this through the years. I have always had the same opinion, it was a terrible tragedy and Ramaphosa is not responsible because he didnt order the police to open fire. Thats a false narrative peddled by unions and the EFF to malign him. A series of factors contributed towards the massacre and all sides have to take responsibility for that mass shooting, you cant just blame the police

I have already explained why Im asking and why political legitimacy matters Its not about Maduro or the US Almost all the most stable and prosperous African countries have gone through free and fair elections and the leadership has legitimacy because of this. So it does matter And Egypt is not a country whose leadership I admire but it is economically stable but that is only part of what matters to me So if you can just answer the question without trying to overthink it that would be great But if you dont care thats also fine. I realize you live in a first world country where free and fair elections are a given but thats not the reality in many parts of Africa and the global south

Nothing to do with the US operation, Im asking outside of Canada do you believe legitimacy for a leader should only be determined by free and fair elections Some people dont care In Africa we have seen 7-8 free and fair elections recently with a peaceful transfer of power and it gets celebrated I support that because political legitimacy in any Democracy matters to me

My question is not about the removing of Maduro by the USA. Im interested if you consider free and fair elections as relevant for domestic legitimacy in any country outside the US? Venezuela claims to be a Democracy and have free and fair elections But Maduro stole the last 2 elections, it was so bad Brazil refused to allow Venezuela to join BRICS in 2024 https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c624m4kgrg3o This is about your own opinion so it is relevant to the question

Do you consider Maduro a legitimate leader for Venezuela? And whats your definition of a legitimate leader in any country that calls itself a Democracy that has elections For me its very simple, you just have to win a free and fair election @rjshae and @Zoraptor Im also interested in what you think about this question and anyone else can respond