Free Markets, Free People

Zelaya Tries To Return To Honduras

He took off a few hours ago from the US in – wait for it – a Venezuelan plane. Naturally the UN has actually gotten off of its rear-end and taken what, for it, is “action”. The UN General Assembly President Miguel D’Escoto Brockmann and a number of journalists are accompanying former Honduran president Mel Zelaya.

Honduras, naturally, has said Zelaya isn’t welcome and has stated they will arrest him should he try to reenter the country. The OAS, in the meantime, has suspended Honduras from the organization.

The interim government (which some news organizations are characterizing as a “military government”) pleads for the rest of the world to back off and let Honduras work this out.

But, with apparently everything under control and in tip top shape in their respective countries, the presidents of Argentina, Ecuador and Paraguay, along with the head of the OAS have time to fly  to El Salvador to “monitor events.”

Meanwhile it is reported that Nicaragua is moving troops toward the Honduran border.  All of this tacitly green-lighted by the Obama administration’s stance.

Fausta is now reporting:

The Venezuelan plane carrying deposed president Mel Zelaya landed in El Salvador, according to Honduran daily El Heraldo. Venezuelan chancellor Nicolás Maduro verified that the airplane was Venezuelan and identified it as YV-1496.

But that’s not meddling – no siree.

Honduras has reported it will not allow the landing of the Venezuelan aircraft carrying Zelaya in Honduras. My guess is they’ll now try to drive into Honduras from El Salvador.

Developing …

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

11 Responses to Zelaya Tries To Return To Honduras

  • It gets better.  Apparently, as they circled overhead, they got wind that EVERYONE on the planes would be arrested upon arrival.
    I suspect that helped with the decision to land elsewhere…

  • Why is meddling wrong?   It was right not to meddle in Iran because it would have hurt US interests, the moderates don’t want us to get involved, and it would have helped the hardliners.  You meddle when it is effective and ethical.  You don’t when it’s not.   Sheesh.  You need a lesson in Foreign Policy 101.

    • Why is meddling wrong? Because it doesn’t benefit wise leftists, that’s why.

      It was right not to meddle in Iran because it would have hurt US interests, the moderates don’t want us to get involved, and it would have helped the hardliners. I decree it. And all those people begging Obama to criticize the theocracy were just plants. I decree that too.

      You meddle when it is effective and ethical. And our meddling in Iraq was definitely not effective or ethical!! The fact that it freed thirty million people is completely beside the point, I tell you, and certainly doesn’t make it effective or ethical. It would have been far more ethical to leave Saddam in power, so he and his sons could continue to rape women and feed their husbands to shredding machines. And you can just forget all this stuff about Iraq being effective because it influences other Middle East countries towards liberalization, just forget that right now, because it’s not true and I absolutely decree that, so stop arguing about it right now! And the fact that you don’t understand any of this just means you’re a dense rightie instead of a wise leftist with godlike powers or political science, like me.

      Sheesh. You need a lesson in Foreign Policy 101. As taught by a wise leftist academic with impeccable credentials, of course. And I’d be happy to teach it to you, and all you have to do is admit that I’m right about everything, even when what I say is completely contradictory, the way today’s comments are when compared with what I’ve said about Iraq for years.

    • Shorter Erb:
      Meddling to benefit those who want their leaders to follow the country’s laws regarding democracy = BAD
      Meddling to benefit the leaders who undermine democracy in favor of dictatorships = GOOD
      —–
      Erb is sh!t. Always has been. It never changes.

    • No, Scott.  You have missed it again.  Obama specifically said the he would not meddle in Iran because American foreign policy was not to meddle.  But now, he is meddling in a country who was following its own Constitution.  There seems to be no perceived benefit to the US except to be able to say we are on the side of Chavez and others who believe that Constitutions do not matter when they are in pursuit of personal political power.
       
      Obama is not only “meddling” in Honduras, he is meddling on the wrong side.  I worry about him and you.
       
      Rick

    • So, it’s ethical to support a power-grabbing would-be dictator?

    • Ah…the clown car arrives…speeding into the arena playing Fanfare for the Common Clown.
      but alas….only one clown, dressed in the trappings of Professor Wagstaff from Horsefeathers, emerges….
      At least, Mr. Foreign Policy expert clown, take the time to review the Constitution of Honduras as pertains to their military and government before running in here tooting your little clown horn and waving your Micky Mouse glove hands around as if you have something important to say.  Your mouth opens in pantomime, and the little clown horn sound breaks the silence.
      They may actually be within the bounds of THEIR laws.  Imagine THEY HAVE THEIR OWN LAWS!  And they would like to follow them, despite the meddling of those who flout their own laws (our current President included) and the U.N. which wants to BE the law for the world.
       

    • I’d also like to know your ‘foreign policy expert’ stand on if it will be OKAY when Venezuela ( loosing a crap load, I wish and hope, of shiny new armored vehicles ) makes incursions into Honduras to put a stop to this ‘coup’.
      Then we can see what Ospama will do too.  I expect he’ll look very stern  and wise  just before he blames it all on Bush.

  • Meddling is wrong since Obama went to GREAT pains to tell us it was wrong to do so, especially in Iran.

    Back away under your rock now.

  • Honduras has made two mistakes:

    1. They let Zelaya live

    2. They didn’t blame the US for the situation

    In other words, had they behaved like Iran, Burma, North Korea, or any of a dozen other brutish countries, we and the “international community” would have meekly acquiesced to what happened there. Hell, had they threatened to invade a neighboring country, we’d have offered to increase their foreign aid!

    Unfortunately, they appear to have tried to behave with some semblence of law and restraint, sending the message that they are a bunch of p*ssies who are willing to be pushed around. Hence, the bullies have come out of the woodwork.

  • Erb is the gift that keeps on giving, like a Doberman with diarrhea.

    His post would indicate that Obama’s actions with respect to Iran showed condemning the actions there was either unethical or ineffective (or both), but that after a week or so, it suddenly became both ethical and effective.

    It also indicates that Obama’s meddling with Honduras (to the point of orchestrating actions with Venezuela) are both effective and ethical. We will eventually see whether they were effective. But it’s not at all ethical to condemn a country for following its own constitution peacefully and lawfully when that country removed a would-be tyrant.

    Good luck convincing anyone here that supporting Zelaya was the ethical thing to do, Scottie boy.