this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2025
54 points (95.0% liked)
United States | News & Politics
7751 readers
511 users here now
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This article is making it seem like maduro actually won the elections with democracy, and that's not what happened at all. Yes, the CNE "confirmed the victory of Maduro", but they're controlled by the same people in this corrupt government, so that doesn't prove a thing. People from the votong polls collected the papers that provide information about the votes per political party, and it shows a clear win for the opposition. Both sources provided in this article about the election in venezuela come from the same website, which isn't exactly clear of bias.
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/08/02/americas/venezuelas-tally-sheets-intl-latam/index.html
https://www.bbc.com/mundo/articles/cjl6j83zwklo
Please take into account maduro forbid Maria Corina Machado from taking part in the election process.
https://elpais.com/america/2024-01-26/el-supremo-de-venezuela-confirma-la-inhabilitacion-de-maria-corina-machado-para-concurrir-en-las-elecciones-presidenciales.html
I don't think the elections were either "free" or "fair" and they probably did rig it, but that doesn't justify invading a country, if you think it does you are just a warmonger. There are plenty of countries with similarly rigged elections that the US doesn't consider invading and the main reason they are so interested in Venezuela is the massive oil resources American oil companies would be able to access if a government friendly to US companies would somehow get into power.
No media is clear of bias, you are a child if you think like that. You just disagree with the bias which is fair, it's your opinion.
I never said it justified invading the country. I also don't deny their interest is only economic. I'm only pointing out the article's lack of coherence with reality, why are you calling me a child?
that is why I said
I don't think you should expect any reporting to be clear of bias, they link dozens of sources throughout the article each with it's own set of biases, do you really need to link a source from every perspective to not disparage them for not being "clear of bias". And I think they quite clearly elaborate why they have included the two Venezuelanalysis articles in the following.
especially with
The author is rejecting the premise of the US and other countries like the UK to "claim the right to arbitrate other sovereign nations’ democratic legitimacy" So why would they link articles like the ones you linked when the author is clearly saying they don't believe in the premise.
Sane idiots that defend democracy in Venezuela were very happy with the violent overthrow of a truly democratic government in Ukraine, killed, persecuted political opposition, forced elected officials into exile, banned half the political parties, and incorporated a neo-nazi brigade financed by the CIA as part of Ukraine's military. Zelensky's term had been up for a long while and refuses elections. But Maduro is the bad guy we should be concerned about. Ukraine's largest oil/gas co. was run and mostly owned by Biden's son. BBC and CNN said the majority of people were pro-NATO/EU, even though the majority had voted for the toppled government that opposed NATO and EU memberships.
No, these people are not naive, or childish, they are paid propaganda trolls just as the US blog https://venezuelanalysis.com/ is. If election results haven't been published how did this blog get its data? Wild imagination?
This comment has inflicted psychic damage on me, congrats.
Venzuelanalysis republished this artcle, what are you even talking about?
https://venezuelanalysis.com/opinion/nyt-advises-trump-to-kill-more-venezuelans/
Susan Singer can give you a clue https://mastodon.online/@slsinger/113959054222615036