[exsmoker]

We should not be in the business of endorsing coups. It's that simple.

nothing is ever that simple, especially in events like this.

"Mr. Zelaya, a close ally of Venezuela's populist President Hugo Chávez, was seized by soldiers acting on a Supreme Court warrant, and sent into exile in his pajamas on June 28. The military acted after the country's courts said he had violated the constitution by trying to enact a referendum that would permit his reelection."

This is the pillar on which the entire coup was based and yet it's patently false.

Zelaya did no such thing. All he did was propose a vote on whether or not to have a vote to modify the constitution. This is a perfectly legal action. But even if he pushed for an extended term (which he didn't), why would that warrant such vitriol? It's not like he's calling for a dictatorship. He'd still have to be duly elected. The threat is that he WOULD be elected with an overwhelming majority of the vote and the Honduran right know it.

Not to mention, we act like a country without term limits is the watermark of a rogue empire?!? By that logic we should overthrow every parliamentary republic in Europe... Germany, Britain, France, ect... If we have any bombs left we could toss one of Australia as well. Hell, we didn't even have term limits until the ratification of the 22nd amendment.

yeah, I don't know noam. you both can't be right. five apples account jibes with what I've read and what my parents have read in chile. did chavez openly call for a dictatorship at first? no, but he's systematically dismantled the democratic system, such as it was, and I believe has stated he intends to be in power for decades. As for our own term limits, they were enacted because FDR disregarded civilized convention and, if there was ever a president who thought he was above the law, it was him (up there with Bush II anyway). I'm not following your argument for throwing out Europe's Republics. to be sure, eventually we may have our own reasons for throwing out our own government. nothing lasts forever. in light of the past, though, term limits would seem to be extremely important in latin america.

The coup was wrong to say the least. However the specifics of the events leading up to it go something like this. The president is very unpopular in his county, however that did not stop him from seeking a referendum on allowing himself to run for another term, which is not allowed under the constitution. The Supreme Court ruled that he could not do this. He ignored the orders of the Supreme Court and printed the ballots for it and then ordered the military to distribute them. The head of the military refused and was sacked. The supreme court then re-instated the leader and once again, with the backing of the legislature, again said zelaya could not go forward. In response zelaya led a group of his followers to a military base and carted off the ballots and distributed them. Hours before the illegal vote was to take place, the army under the orders of the supreme court and the legislature arrested him and shipped him off to Costa Rica. The reason they said, there is no procedure in their constitution for impeachment, which is true. The people of Honduras appear to be happy with the outcome.

THE UNITED STATES HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS!!!

why was the coup wrong? to me it says they didn't trust the institutional process to work, that they expected it to break down. It's not right, but it's hard to say it was wrong. IMO. Ultimately, the outcome will judge whether it was good or bad. If they go ahead with the elections and the country moves on, it wil likely be viewed as a good thing. If it recurs, not so much.