- Apr 5, 2010
- Reaction score
Which are part of our country, made up of shareholders of our citizens, and deserve the protection of our government when some two bit socialist moron tries to steal from them.Tears are not weapons. Stated policies and viewpoints are not weapons. It does not rise to the level of a "national threat". You don't have that. You have some pissed off corporations.And Venezuela was rightly sued.Venezuela had no problem selling to China. Companies were compensated fairly up until 2008. Then Exxon and Conoco slammed Venezuela with lawsuits. Even so, none of that makes Venezuela a "national security threat". It doesn't rise to that level.That's only fair. Nationalizing does imply paying. Confiscating implies taking.Wanted to make them pay for nationalizing their industries. That's telling.Venezuela screwed itself up, it didn't need our help. They had plenty of other markets for their Oil. We didn't make them nationalize industries, or try end runs around their own Constitution.
The only thing that can really be "blamed" on us is our resurgent Oil industry, which lowered overall global crude prices.
If a US company invested in a company that was to be nationalized, they expect and should expect compensation.
They are a threat because of their stated policies and viewpoints, and their destabilizing effect on the region.
If the US parks a CBG in the Med off of Spain or Italy, they look forward to the shore leaves, we do the same to Venezuela they will cry to the UN and anyone else that will listen.
That's the difference between a threat and not a threat.
An attack against our interests is an attack against us.