I dislike Bolsonaro as much as the next guy (probably more), but that's beside the point. I mean, not in terms of the motivations for his government's policy perhaps, but in terms of the bottom line: The Amazon is burning much too much this year.

Even if it had been Mr. Lula, or Ms. Rousef, and the fires had been the same, there would have been the exact same level of criticism due on the environmental issue.

There were much worse fires in those administrations, and no internation commotion and criticism like what we're seeing now.

http://queimadas.dgi.inpe.br/queimadas/portal/estatistica_pa...

The Amazon is not "burning too much". It's in fact below the historical average.

>There were much worse fires in those administrations, and no internation commotion and criticism like what we're seeing now.

Perhaps because those offices weren't publicly, overtly and self-admittedly anti-environment. They didn't call themselves "Captain Chainsaw", for one.

He called himself that jokingly, being ironic about how he's disproportionately blamed about the situation. Come on, at least argue in good faith, don't be disingenuous.

He recently said that now he went from being Captain Chainsaw to being Nero. Are you going to say he likens himself to Nero too?

I mean, once you burn “some area”, there isn’t “some area” to burn, so you will end up with a smaller global area to burn. That’s how you can say something like this..

I'm not saying that Brazil has had a stellar line-up of presidents, and anyone would have had to react to this, and the mettle of the person would be seen in their response.

Bolsonaro's was essentially, "it's a conspiracy against me". It's a pretty extraordinary idea to begin with, and stating it as fact to the press without backing it up with evidence makes my alarms go off at least.

s/would have/should have/ I guess.