2006-08-04 10:52:29 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
And what did other nations do? nothing.
This is a moral issue for other to take
He is a world leader by all means read about him to get to know the man
2006-08-04 10:58:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Strategically, Chavez is trying to form a block of nations together to counter the hedgmony of the United States. Withdrawing his ambassador is an intentional public action to aid his goal by acting against the interests of Israel, a U.S. ally.
2006-08-04 11:10:36 · answer #2 · answered by garfielddean1 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Chavez with has sided with Iran. Maybe something is going to be hitting the fan real soon in Israel. The Iranian President has inferred as much recently. We'll see. The official Jihad has began. Remember the most committed wins.
2006-08-04 10:58:23 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I like Chavez, but withdrawing a diplomatic representation thus cutting diplomatic ties is a big mistake, not matter how far apart two countries' positions and interests may be.
2006-08-04 10:57:06 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Chavez wants to convince himself that he is an important world figure. Since he went to Iran, it looks like he is willing to be a stooge for Iran.
I think Islamo-facists and communists are very similar. Human life means nothing to them and brainwashing is the order of the day for their children.
2006-08-04 10:59:31 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Chavez is trying to build an oil cooperative to punish the west, but the problem is that he fails to understand supply and demand. He and his loser buddies in Iran may have a large supply of oil, but if he cannot sell it to other powers he and Ahminenjihad will be broke and deposed.
2006-08-05 10:16:35 · answer #6 · answered by juicer_jones 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Something has to be done about Israel, but I agree with the other person that cutting off diplomatic ties is counterproductive.
2006-08-04 11:04:14 · answer #7 · answered by bradcymru 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
feels like a theory from somebody of Buddhist mysticism or some eastern proper philosophical equipment. The you maximum possibly correlated to the ego, the "I" that we parade around in our daily lives. yet our genuine selves, what's left after the ego has dissolved, exists in a sort of infinity. it is a attractive theory, it speaks to the grandeur of existence, the interior-connectedness of all issues. you're here, yet you're additionally everywhere at as quickly as.
2016-11-03 21:52:19 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why does everyone care what this dictator of a third-world power does.
2006-08-04 11:02:57 · answer #9 · answered by bumpocooper 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
more than that namby pamby blair has the guts to do
2006-08-04 10:58:25 · answer #10 · answered by asdfgh 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋