Let me seem we won't interfer with Iran's internal struggle where the people want to reform the government because they feel the Government stole the election; however, we will interfer in the internal affairs of a country where the military is performing its constitutional duty. The Honduran constitution is clear about the term limits of the president and the country's highest court has ruled the president was commiting an illegal act. Based on the above the military stepped in and defended and protected the constitution of the Country.

We should stay out of their business and the media should stop calling it a coup and call it what it is, the removal of a President who was trying to commit and illegal act.

there we go again with that word, Crisis. A crisis here a crisis there, some real some made-up. Obama admin... keep those crisis comming!

The US has been too involved lately in regime change. The problem is that the regimes that really need change (North Korea, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela) don't get the attention of our policy makers, while they do go after regimes that veer to the right (like Honduras) or regimes that don't have WMD (like Iraq). When will we stop interfering where we shouldn't?

I'm not sure I understand this story completely. Let's say the president of the U.S. wanted to change the Constitution and term limits, it came before the Supreme Court, and they ruled, "No, you can't do it." What then? In America, the Congress and Senate would have to impeach the president to get him out of office, it wouldn't be the Supreme Court that did it. So what is happening in Honduras? Did the Congress vote to impeach him, and that's why he is out of power? Why is the U.S. government even involved? Can you imagine England trying to re-establish an impeached president? I'm missing why it is the U.S. wants this guy back in.

"Why is the U.S. government even involved?"

Zelaya is a socialist. Birds of a feather, and all that.

Under their Constitution, anyone who advocates changing the term limits for President is to be immediately removed. Which their Supreme Court, Congress, and military did. They have to have it this way, given the Latin American history of dictators for life. They even have a word for it - I think it's continuismo.

Sad day when the USA is on the same side with Castro, Chavez and every other tin pot dictator. If we couldn't side with them, we should have at least stayed neutral and kept our big mouth shut about the internal affairs of another nation.