To set precedent for other countries to intervene when Obama is supposed to leave office? 

So the military ousting of a democratically elected President isn't a coup de tat?

I guess with ostensible legal cover, the overthrow becomes acceptable.

@CelestialTeapot - No the legislator and courts called in the military to kick him out. One needs police to enforce laws. The military followed the law. Do you want to call their own constution mere"cover"?

Honduras has seen a lot of turmoil,I hope a day of peace comes to them someday.

@seedsower - They actually did this none violently for a change

 It could be because Zelaya never actually planned on seeking re-election. The coup happened because the establishment didn't like a planned non-binding consultative poll on whether to conduct a referendum in November to convene the constitutional assembly and possibly draft a new constitution. True, this could lead to a radical change like President-for-life, but, in all likelihood, it wouldn't. Zelaya didn't even propose it. All he did was support it. If the assembly had happened, it would have gone through at the same time as the election, meaning he wouldn't be allowed to run, regardless of what was decided.

Do you really prefer having illegitmate rulers over a democratically elected president who did nothing wrong?

As they have no mechanism for impeachment, it's hard to say that everything that has been done is legal, on any side.  It's clear that the (former) president was attempting to exceed his power and acting in ways detrimental to his office (my opinion, since it resulted in the current situation), but it's difficult for me to think that simply deposing of the man, elected fairly(?) and democratically, is an acceptable outcome.

@trunthepaige - Somehow, this legal overthrow was neatly accompanied by suppression of media and demonstrations.

There's also the issue of the President's forged letter of resignation.

@Accolade - There isn't a shred of evidence that sugggests Zelaya was trying to exceed his power. Referendums are crucial for democracy and hondura's Cold War Constitution doesn't allow for them. All that was proposed was a poll on whether or not to allow a referendum that would make drafting a new constitution possible.

@another_rebel_without_a_cause - Actually yes I prefer legal rulers in democrat republics to popular despots. The checks and balances in a democratic system are very important. Now I had not heard that he was not really trying to extend his presidency . One needs to wonder the purpose of the referendum if not to extend his power? And referendums are not part of The USA's democracy. So calling them crucial, well I don't see that at all.

But then this does go back to them following their own laws and the laws are not unjust ones. No one is being hurt, why are we involved?

@CelestialTeapot -  All well and good and I admit that I am not as well informed on this as I would like to be. Seems our media has almost no interest in objectively telling the tale.

@another_rebel_without_a_cause - I want to believe you because of your calm words and solemn profile picture.  That's legit, right?

I thought the legislature in Honduras had passed a law specifically prohibiting el presidente's actions.  I, along with the rest of the bandwagon, assumed he would be standing for re-election if his efforts were successful.

What I meant to say is that referendums have had a critical role in modern Latin America. The fact remains that the only people claiming he was trying to extend his presidency are the people trying to justify throwing him out of office. Even if it allowed for more terms, Zelaya wouldn't be able to take advantage of them.

People may not have been beaten or killed yet, but every voice of opposition that reaches the masses other than, say, Twitter, have faced intimdation and terror tactics. For trying to relay a message not onboard with the line of the men who took over the government, the military assaulted a radio station.

This isn't peace. We aren't threatening to send in troops. We're threatening to cut off ties with Honduras because, so far, they've shown a complete disregard for the democratic system

@CelestialTeapot - Demonstrations have NOT been suppressed. I have contacts in Honduras who have said that it took them eight hours to get through the crowds of people from the airport to downtown Tegucigalpa, a normally half-hour drive.

Those who were demonstrating were from both sides - pro-Zelaya and pro-democracy, explaining the delay and also refuting your lie that demonstrations are being supressed.

The media, which the Honduran government is giving free reign, is choosing not to cover the pro-democracy demonstrations because the media is controlled by pro-Zelaya leftists.

So who's REALLY suppressing the truth in Tegu? 

@another_rebel_without_a_cause - See above.

My god, I'm becoming the person I hate; blog debater.

@Accolade - The president didn't come up with the idea of the referendum, he merely supported it. Sure, drafting a new constitution could have unforseen consequences, but the only people to claim Zelaya wanted more power are the people who ousted him. The poll was less than 180 days away from the general election. That is the ONLY thing that caused the legislature to deem it illegal. Whether or not the poll is really illegal is open to debate.

The poll would have been a democratic vote for allowing the consitutional assembly to convene and draft a new constitution. Had the vote come back as no, the assembly wouldn't do anything. What's more, the assembly would meet during the general election meaning that, even if they abolished the one term rule, Zelaya would receive no benefit for it as he'd be running under the old constitution.

Frankly, I blame any lack of knowledge or misunderstanding on the news coverage.

@SwordAndSacrifice - I didn't claim that protesters have been suppressed, just media coverage.

@another_rebel_without_a_cause - News coverage?  What is that, their has been none. The only thing we hear is "military take over".  Leaving out that they were following the law at the request of the legislator. It is not such a simple story and they are not reporting it.

Obama & the rest of the world united, every country on Earth signed onto the UN resolution calling for Zelaya's return. The did this because like it or not Manuel Zelaya was democratically elected. The way he was thrown out of his own country...a forged resignation letter, escorted by gunpoint in his pajamas, crackdown and suppression of free speech...is not how we should encourage any country to act.
When the coup first occurred the Honduras military begged the US to recognize the new government. The reason couldn't do it was because of President Bush. In 2002 President Bush signed a directive for the CIA to coordinate with a faction of Venezuelan generals to overthrow Hugo Chavez in a coup. Hugo Chavez was thrown out of power for three days, The US regonized the new government but then Chavez returned and beat back the coup. He came back into power stronger and from 2002 to 2008 became the dominant force in South America because of President Bush's interference in their affairs. Every leader in South America knew we had a hand in overthrowing Chavez.
After this Honduras coup happened Chavez went to blame the US for interference. But the Honduran President who is close to Chavez told the BBC that it is because of the US and Obama not recognizing the new leaders he owed us for rallying the International community.
The short of it? If we had endorsed the new government we would have given any officer in South America (who were trained at US schools by the way at the OAS) permission to overthrow their governments and pissed off a whole continent for another 8 years. Obama acted as he did because Bush forced him too in how Bush acted in the Chavez attempted coup in 2002...

That's funny, isn't it?  Why indeed, are we supporting tyranny and worse - CALLING IT FREEDOM?  Our President, Mr. Obama, "The Messiah," has stated that they need to "restore democracy" by re-instating the president who tried to overthrow that very idea.  I think (a) our government is showing its true colors and anyone who still denies that  it is out of control has their head inserted so far up their own arse that they'll probably never get it out, and (b) our government is scared to death of the fact that some people still remember what FREEDOM is really about and are willing to DO SOMETHING to protect it.

@Leonidas - Yes he was democratically elected, he also attempted to circumvent the democratically designated limits on his term, did you miss that or do you only pay attention to the facts that are convenient to your case?  The fact that he was democratically elected as president, does not give him the right to usurp their constitution and make himself a dictator. 

@CelestialTeapot - So, because someone is democratically elected, none of the countries laws or constitutional documents apply anymore?  

@radicalramblings - He was proposing a NONbinding resolution. I agree that he was trying to set up the steps to take power. But nevertheless Obama if he wants to make any headway in foreign policy has to condemn the coup. You don't see Obama readying the marines to bring Zelaya back into power. he condemned it and had universal...every country in the world...support the UN resolution. Honduras can do what it wants with the resolution.
You mention 'convienent' facts? Read our recent history and our old history in our involvement in supporting South American coups. From Pinnochet forward we have supported some of the most brutal dicatators who ever came to power. If we want to make any gains with street opinion in South America that can benefit our policy for the better then we can not allow power to be seized militarily. Maybe you should do some reading of our history down there and get better educated...

@Leonidas - No, Obama if he doesn't want to set a modern precedent of presidents who usurp their nation's constitution being forcibly removed from office, has to support the latest idiotic playground-bully resolution of the UN.  

Are we the world's policeman? Under that logic we should right now we should be invading Russia, Zimbabwe, Somalia, Mauritania, Niger, Bolivia, Salvador, Sudan and a few other countries all of whom had constitutions that were democratic and have been changed due to recent shifts or presidents tinkering with them.
I have a friend in Honduras and asked her about the situation when this first broke out. Right now there are curfews in place, freedom of speech and all other constitutional rights have been suspended. The only way we could talk at all was through the internet because the government has yet to cut that off. And you want to recognize these new thugs as the bastion of protecting democracy?
Have you learned any lesson of the past 8 years? We have no business telling other countries how to live except to condemn them if they had democracies and are abandoning the values of them. We are not doing so well here in this country with our own democratic ideals. Obama's actions regarding Honduras were the actions of a true conservative foreign policy that the founding fathers called for. We have no business and gain nothing if we endorsed a military coup in South America...

@another_rebel_without_a_cause - And I agree.

But the Honduran media supports Zelaya and is not covering the half of the of the story that is in conflict with their own interests. Since non-Honduran media doesn't know what's going on in the first place, they have to rely on the INTERNAL Honduran media with whom they already have connection.

And, as we discussed, it's not in their political interest to tell the whole story.