BruceVC

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

No, I wouldn't cheerlead any stable Democratically elected government being regime changed by the US You clearly haven't been reading any of my posts over the last 15 years