PDA

View Full Version : Pence Says U.S. to Provide $16 Million in Aid to Venezuelan Refugees




juleswin
05-23-2018, 05:04 PM
Pence Says U.S. to Provide $16 Million in Aid to Venezuelan Refugees

The vice president raises possibility of ‘additional sanctions and additional isolation’ for Venezuelan officials

By Louise Radnofsky
April 13, 2018 8:35 p.m. ET
42 COMMENTS
The U.S. will provide $16 million in aid to Venezuelans who have fled their homeland amid a growing humanitarian and economic crisis, Vice President Mike Pence said Friday as he arrived in Peru for a day of talks with Latin American leaders.

“We are with the people of Venezuela and will continue to do everything in our power to provide sustenance and support to those who have fled,” Mr. Pence said. The U.S. funds will go to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and on to communities in Colombia and Brazil flooded by Venezuelans who left their country searching for food, medicines and work.

Mr. Pence is attending the Summit of the Americas in Lima in place of President Donald Trump, who cited the ongoing decision-making over chemical weapon attacks in Syria for keeping him in Washington.

The U.S. and a slew of governments across the Americas have said they won’t stand by as Venezuela slides into what they call a dictatorship. But for now, there have been few tangible results from mostly economic sanctions leveled against President Nicolás Maduro’s regime.

Mr. Pence said the Trump administration wants to provide aid directly to people inside of Venezuela but is blocked from doing so. The vice president raised the prospect of “additional sanctions and additional isolation” for Venezuelan officials.

“Nicolás Maduro stands in the way,” he said, “refusing humanitarian aid to be delivered to Venezuela, and the world deserves to know that.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/pence-says-u-s-to-provide-16-million-in-aid-to-venezuelan-refugees-1523666151

Smart man, humanitarian aid, bombs and wars have the same effect on a nation when donated by the imperialist US. Reject it all and you might just have the opportunity to fight another day.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-r9UrC2uFfM&t=6s

phill4paul
05-23-2018, 05:05 PM
If you keep giving them your money they will keep spending it. <shrug>

juleswin
05-23-2018, 06:16 PM
If you keep giving them your money they will keep spending it. <shrug>

Give them money? they just borrow and print it even if you didn't give them a penny. The system is self sustaining now.

phill4paul
05-23-2018, 06:23 PM
Give them money? they just borrow and print it even if you didn't give them a penny. The system is self sustaining now.

Exactly, Sherlock. So why give them anything? They've got it covered. Until they don't.

euphemia
05-23-2018, 07:18 PM
Might as well light the money on fire.

Anti Globalist
05-23-2018, 07:39 PM
See the Trump administration does care about refugees .

juleswin
05-23-2018, 08:16 PM
Might as well light the money on fire.

You do know the money is not free money. The money most likely would be used to buy influence with revolutionary groups n the country and they would be used to take down the govt. And the return of investment would be massive when that actually come through.

angelatc
05-23-2018, 08:25 PM
You do know the money is not free money. The money most likely would be used to buy influence with revolutionary groups n the country and they would be used to take down the govt. And the return of investment would be massive when that actually come through.

People there are literally starving to death. For the love of God, what kind of a monster allows that to happen simply because he wants to retain power?

juleswin
05-23-2018, 08:45 PM
People there are literally starving to death. For the love of God, what kind of a monster allows that to happen simply because he wants to retain power?

Jesus H Christ Angeltc, you mean the people who have been piling up sanction against your people to the point your people are starving now come bearing gifts and you see no problem accepting it? I mean, they could lift the sanctions and you can buy the food your god damn self. But no, they want to help your starving people inside your country "wink" "wink". The same people are so humanitarian that they are helping the Saudis slaughter Yemenis as we speak.

But put that aside, sacrifice, perseverance these are some of the qualities a nation has to lean on in these trying times. If you think a country who stood by while 500k Iraqi children starved care about some starving refugees then you must be the most naive person I have ever met. The pittance in charity now will be used to dominate the country and steal the country's future.

There is no guarantee that Venezuela even with the sacrifice they are going through would resist the advances of the US, but if they can ride this stormy weather, generations of Venezuelans would thank this generation for their sacrifice. This is one part where libertarianism ideology would fail a people cos if Venezuela were filled with libertarians like Angeltac, they would have given in at the first offer of a cheese burger. It's about their needs now not about the future and well being of the nation.

Swordsmyth
05-23-2018, 08:54 PM
Che is a good example of one of the worst effects of interfering in foreign countries, it gives them an excuse to pretend that foreign meddling is entirely responsible for their problems.

Communism is the primary factor in their troubles and outside interference just adds a little bit more.

angelatc
05-23-2018, 08:58 PM
Jesus H Christ Angeltc, you mean the people who have been piling up sanction against your people to the point your people are starving now come bearing gifts and you see no problem accepting it? .

Again, there weren't any sanctions against Venezuela until a few days ago. And aside from that - Yes, I would absolutely surrender if it meant that millions of people could fucking eat.

juleswin
05-23-2018, 09:06 PM
Again, there weren't any sanctions against Venezuela until a few days ago. And aside from that - Yes, I would absolutely surrender if it meant that millions of people could $#@!ing eat.

Your googling skills is failing you.


Caracas, January 16, 2016 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Outgoing US President Barack Obama renewed a controversial executive order Friday that designates Venezuela as an “unusual and extraordinary threat” to national security.

In one of his last acts as president, Obama stated that he had decided to extend the executive order given that Venezuela’s situation had “not improved” since the decree was first renewed last March.

In particular he cited the Venezuelan government’s alleged “erosion of human rights guarantees, persecution of political opponents, curtailment of press freedoms, use of violence and human rights violations and abuses in response to anti-government protests, and arbitrary arrest and detention of anti-government protestors, as well as the exacerbating presence of significant government corruption,” as the reasons for the renewal.

Initially approved in March 2015, the Executive Order declares a “national emergency” with regards to Venezuela and was accompanied by US sanctions against several Venezuelan officials. The move was immediately met with protest from the Maduro administration in Venezuela and its allies in Latin America, while over a million Venezuelans also signed a public petition calling on Obama to repeal the order.

Although the decree does not technically expire until this coming March, a spokesman for the National Security Council said that Obama had decided to “renew all national emergencies” in order to guarantee “a smooth transition” over to the new administration of Republican President-elect Donald Trump next week.

"This will ensure that the new administration will not need to immediately undertake renewals necessary to safeguard our national security as it works to put its national security team in place and secure Senate confirmation of relevant appointees,” said spokesperson Ned Price.

Although the order may be repealed by incoming President-elect Donald Trump, it is unlikely that the new president will do so. Trump has made several public statements condemning Venezuela’s left-wing government as dictatorial.

Reacting to the news on Friday, Venezuela’s Foreign Minister, Delcy Rodriguez, said that her government “categorically rejected” the renewal and labelled it a “new aggression by Barack Obama” as well as part of his “legacy of hate and serious violations of international law”.

Other countries affected by the move are Iran, Cuba, Libya, Zimbabwe and Russia.


This is just the official measure on the books. God know what the CIA and other intel groups have cooked up against that poor country.

angelatc
05-23-2018, 09:17 PM
From the very paragraph you provided:


Initially approved in March 2015, the Executive Order declares a “national emergency” with regards to Venezuela and was accompanied by US sanctions against several Venezuelan officials.

Not the country. Now do you want to go do some homework, or do you need me to tell you who each of those people are? It's a pretty short list. And I am 100% confident that seizing all their assets, raping their wives, shooting their dogs and selling their children wouldn't have made as much as a blip on the Venezuelan economy.

oyarde
05-23-2018, 10:17 PM
Foreign aid should be for charities . Not tax dollars .

angelatc
05-24-2018, 06:44 AM
Foreign aid should be for charities . Not tax dollars .

And charity should come from individuals, not the CIA. But their leader won't allow that. This is exactly why socialism always fails in reality. On paper, it's a great plan. In reality, the psychopaths have all the power.

The allegation that this is a CIA orchestrated failure is as crazy as Firestarter though.

Ender
05-24-2018, 09:21 AM
And charity should come from individuals, not the CIA. But their leader won't allow that. This is exactly why socialism always fails in reality. On paper, it's a great plan. In reality, the psychopaths have all the power.

The allegation that this is a CIA orchestrated failure is as crazy as Firestarter though.

I repeat:

This article written in Jan 2018 talks about Trump's sanctions in Aug 2017 & what more sanctions will do (have done, as of now).

Why More Sanctions Won’t Help Venezuela
The people, not the government, will pay the price.


During the first year of his administration, U.S. President Donald Trump has taken an increasingly hard line against the government of Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro. Washington has tightened sanctions on Caracas and even suggested a military intervention to remove the Venezuelan leader from office. Twelve months into Trump’s term, Maduro seems even more entrenched in power, and Venezuela’s opposition is more fractured than ever.

U.S. foreign policy toward Venezuela is premised on a series of misconceptions. Perhaps the most widespread and serious one is the idea that Venezuela is a totalitarian dictatorship. While Maduro has certainly done many things to undermine democracy, Venezuela is no North Korea.

Venezuela is not a tyrannical autocracy; it is a deeply divided and polarized society.Venezuela is not a tyrannical autocracy; it is a deeply divided and polarized society. Public opinion research shows strong and deep-seated support for Chavismo, the movement created by the late populist leader Hugo Chávez, among large swathes of the population. Many voters continue to credit Chavismo with redistributing the country’s oil wealth through its social programs and giving the poor a voice in Venezuelan politics. Around 25 percent of Venezuelans support Chávez’s successor, Maduro — a remarkably high number given the state of the economy — and about 50 percent believe that Chávez was a good president. Recent regional elections have shown that the government coalition is able to mobilize close to 6 million voters to support its candidates — nearly one-third of the country’s adult population, and more than enough to win a low-turnout election.

In addition to misreading the country’s political mood, American policymakers also seem convinced that the country’s authoritarian leader will only leave power by force. Economic sanctions are ostensibly intended to raise costs for the military and are expected to somehow spur a rebellion against Maduro. This misguided approach stems from a poor understanding of the government’s internal dynamics and an excessive faith in the effectiveness of sanctions as a tool for bringing about regime change.

Extensive academic research has shown that economic sanctions are rarely effective. When they work, it is because they offer the sanctioned regime incentives along with a way out by altering the conduct that led to the sanctions being imposed (such as the rollback of Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for access to international trade). By contrast, the sanctions against Venezuela have backed the regime into a corner, increasing the costs that the government would face upon leaving power and raising the incentives for Maduro to dig in his heels.

An even more problematic idea driving current U.S. policy is the belief that financial sanctions can hurt the Venezuelan government without causing serious harm to ordinary Venezuelans. That’s impossible when 95 percent of Venezuela’s export revenue comes from oil sold by the state-owned oil company. Cutting off the government’s access to dollars will leave the economy without the hard currency needed to pay for imports of food and medicine. Starving the Venezuelan economy of its foreign currency earnings risks turning the country’s current humanitarian crisis into a full-blown humanitarian catastrophe.

That’s what began to happen in 2017. Last year, Venezuela’s export revenues rose from $28 to $32 billion, buoyed by the recovery in world oil prices. Under normal conditions, a rise in a country’s exports would leave it with more resources to pay for its imports. But in the Venezuelan case, imports fell by 31 percent during the same year. The reason is that the country lost access to international financial markets. Unable to roll over its debt, it was forced to build up huge external surpluses to continue servicing that debt in a desperate attempt to avoid a default. Meanwhile, creditors threatened to seize the Venezuelan government’s remaining revenue sources if the country defaulted, including refineries located abroad and payments for oil shipments.

U.S. economic sanctions have stopped Venezuela from issuing new debt and blocked attempts to restructure its existing debt obligations. Major financial institutions have delayed the processing of all financial transfers from Venezuelan entities, significantly hampering the ability of Venezuelan companies to do business in the United States. Even Citgo, a Venezuelan-owned subsidiary that owns 4 percent of the United States’ refining capacity, hasn’t been able to get U.S. financial institutions to issue routine trade credit since sanctions were imposed.

Ever since the Vietnam War, most American policymakers have understood that foreign policy is not just about outgunning your opponent but also about winning the hearts and minds of the people. But 56 percent of Venezuelans oppose U.S. financial sanctions; only 32 percent support them. When it comes to foreign military intervention in Venezuela, 57 percent of those surveyed were opposed, while 58 percent support dialogue between the government and the opposition — and 71 percent believe that those talks should focus on seeking solutions to the country’s economic problems.

juleswin
05-24-2018, 09:33 AM
From the very paragraph you provided:



Not the country. Now do you want to go do some homework, or do you need me to tell you who each of those people are? It's a pretty short list. And I am 100% confident that seizing all their assets, raping their wives, shooting their dogs and selling their children wouldn't have made as much as a blip on the Venezuelan economy.

It is no secret that sanctions are put in place to collectively punish the general populous, cause unrest and make said more susceptible to overthrow. Maybe the people sanctioned had shares in private companies, were board members in private companies or had some partnership with private companies. Those companies would also bear the brunt of the sanctions too.

Also, you can see that some of those people worked in national security. Those guys could be the ones fighting the American supported opposition trying to sabotage the country economically. This is speculation on my part but I make my guess knowing the history of the US destabilizing enemy countries and I see that history continuing today.

angelatc
05-24-2018, 11:54 AM
It is no secret that sanctions are put in place to collectively punish the general populous,.

Apparently it is beyond you to distinguish between the government and the people running it.

The fact (and it is indeed a fact) that the sanctions were not against the country and/or the populace doesn't mean a damned thing to you. You are now literally hallucinating a fictional reality in order to avoid the truth of the matter, which is that your beloved socialism always ends up with the socialists in charge looting the populace. FFS, Chavez's daughter is now far and away the wealthiest person in the country.

Obama put the sanctions into place to try to prevent specific individuals from taking their loot and fleeing to America while avoiding broader sanctions against the country which would harm the populace.

This just yet another entirely predictable failure of socialism, and face it: you were wrong again. There were no sanctions against Venezuela. Long paragraphs of speculations won't change that.

juleswin
05-24-2018, 12:19 PM
Apparently it is beyond you to distinguish between the government and the people running it.

The fact (and it is indeed a fact) that the sanctions were not against the country and/or the populace doesn't mean a damned thing to you. You are now literally hallucinating a fictional reality in order to avoid the truth of the matter, which is that your beloved socialism always ends up with the socialists in charge looting the populace. FFS, Chavez's daughter is now far and away the wealthiest person in the country.

Obama put the sanctions into place to try to prevent specific individuals from taking their loot and fleeing to America while avoiding broader sanctions against the country which would harm the populace.

This just yet another entirely predictable failure of socialism, and face it: you were wrong again. There were no sanctions against Venezuela. Long paragraphs of speculations won't change that.

I cannot prove it but I know these people, their history, their intentions for non compliant countries. I know its not to stop security personals fighting the opposition fighters they fund from depositing their money and/or running to the US(a completely suicidal for anyone in the Venezuelan govt to do) but unfortunately, I cannot prove it at this point in time.

The same way I knew that the non fly zone resolution(explicitly written to say that it was not about regime change) signed by the US with help from the UN was not to provide relieve the humanitarian suffering in Libya but was then used to further a regime change campaign. Yes, I do not have the proof just like in the case of Libya so in a way, you win this round. Touche.

Ender
05-24-2018, 12:39 PM
Apparently it is beyond you to distinguish between the government and the people running it.

The fact (and it is indeed a fact) that the sanctions were not against the country and/or the populace doesn't mean a damned thing to you. You are now literally hallucinating a fictional reality in order to avoid the truth of the matter, which is that your beloved socialism always ends up with the socialists in charge looting the populace. FFS, Chavez's daughter is now far and away the wealthiest person in the country.

Obama put the sanctions into place to try to prevent specific individuals from taking their loot and fleeing to America while avoiding broader sanctions against the country which would harm the populace.

This just yet another entirely predictable failure of socialism, and face it: you were wrong again. There were no sanctions against Venezuela. Long paragraphs of speculations won't change that.

Trump put sanctions against Venezuela in Aug of 2017.

So- YES- there were sanctions already on Venezuela before this week.

The Gold Standard
05-24-2018, 12:44 PM
This is exactly why socialism always fails in reality. On paper, it's a great plan.

No, it's not. On paper, it ensures that society is left entirely unaware of, and as a result incapable of producing the resources needed to sustain its population. Hence starvation, the common thread of all socialist economies.

angelatc
05-24-2018, 07:35 PM
No, it's not. On paper, it ensures that society is left entirely unaware of, and as a result incapable of producing the resources needed to sustain its population. Hence starvation, the common thread of all socialist economies.

Well, I think that on paper, it disregards humanity. It assumes that everybody will choose to work for a common good, that the bureaucrats will always make exactly the right decisions for that common good, and that the common good is indeed the greater good.

Reality, which capitalism addresses, is that people are greedy. And that what's good for you might be bad for me.

phill4paul
05-24-2018, 07:48 PM
No, it's not. On paper, it ensures that society is left entirely unaware of, and as a result incapable of producing the resources needed to sustain its population. Hence starvation, the common thread of all socialist economies.

A-Fuckin'-men. Hundreds of millions are unaware that they have a weeks to live if transportation of goods and fresh water distribution is interrupted.

The Gold Standard
05-25-2018, 08:44 AM
Well, I think that on paper, it disregards humanity. It assumes that everybody will choose to work for a common good, that the bureaucrats will always make exactly the right decisions for that common good, and that the common good is indeed the greater good.

Reality, which capitalism addresses, is that people are greedy. And that what's good for you might be bad for me.

That's the thing, even if we were all perfect beings that lived for the greater good, socialism still can't work. Mises established that long ago. Without market prices, there is no way to coordinate the needs of a society. Decisions on how to use resources will be made politically, and without profit/loss motives, no one can know if those resources should have been deployed elsewhere. The Department of Food would have to predict how much people were going to eat. The Department of Labor would have to determine how many workers should be farmers versus how many should be soldiers or dentists or truck drivers. Even with the best of intentions at heart, they can't know the answers to those things. People will live in poverty and starve as a result of the great empathy of their socialist utopia.

PierzStyx
05-25-2018, 08:53 AM
Might as well light the money on fire.

That and this, the refugees, is better than spending it on murdering Middle Easterners and generating terrorism. I take the position Ron did on earmarks, if it has to be spent, better this than war.

PierzStyx
05-25-2018, 09:03 AM
Well, I think that on paper, it disregards humanity. It assumes that everybody will choose to work for a common good, that the bureaucrats will always make exactly the right decisions for that common good, and that the common good is indeed the greater good.

Reality, which capitalism addresses, is that people are greedy. And that what's good for you might be bad for me.

Tom Woods did an episode on how communism, even in a world of saints and angels, is impossible and could not function because it has no way to measure wants and needs. He then talks about how in capitalism the price system allows entrepreneurs to measure the wants and needs of people so they know what to produce more and less of and when to do it. It is a good podcast and not long.

https://tomwoods.com/ep-1104-what-i-told-college-students-about-communism/

angelatc
05-25-2018, 09:08 AM
Tom Woods did an episode on how communism, even in a world of saints and angels, is impossible and could not function because it has no way to measure wants and needs. He then talks about how in capitalism the price system allows entrepreneurs to measure the wants and needs of people so they know what to produce more and less of and when to do it. It is a good podcast and not long.

https://tomwoods.com/ep-1104-what-i-told-college-students-about-communism/

There are no wants in communism. Only needs.