Early Sunday morning president Manuel Zelaya of Honduras was forced from his home by soldiers, still in his pajamas, and taken to Costa Rica. The move came on the day Hondurans were to vote on a controversial referendum that could have changed the number of terms presidents can serve. Analysis of news coverage shows differing perspectives, ranging from the evolving stance of the United States to the perceived struggle of democracy versus communism.

First we look to The Miami Herald who spoke with local Honduran, Maria Portillo. She feels the military was only doing their job by removing Zelaya.

“The military is supposed to protect the country and that's what they did today. The way the president was acting has just not been correct. This is a country that does not want to be Communist.”

Al Jazeera English brings us Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez’s reaction to the coup. He sees the position of the US as very influential on the eventual outcome.

“The North American Empire, the Yankee Empire, has a lot to do with this. The president of the United States should come forward immediately. I call him to come forward and like us, from deep down inside, reject this attack. An attack that’s not only against Honduras, but against the Latin American people, against dignity, against true democracy.”

Investigative blog At-largely.com thinks opponents to the President should have put him to trial, rather than stage a military takeover.

“Regardless of how corrupt Zelaya was or was perceived to be as the leader of Honduras, an arrest and trial would be the proper method for his removal. Dropping Zelaya off in Costa Rica and not hold[ing] him accountable is not justice for his alleged crimes. It is simply a coup.”

Russia Today spoke with the co-director of The Center of Economic Policy and Research who thinks the position of the United States will continue to evolve as more countries take a firm stance.

“Starting out early yesterday the US position as kind of ambiguous with pres Obama saying that all parties should try and resolve things peacefully. And then you got a slightly somewhat stronger statement form Hilary Clinton later in the day and then finally by the end of the day after all these other governments had said that Zelaya was the only legitimate president. You had anonymous State Department officials, not a public statement but anonymous officials, saying the same thing, you can see how the US position has already evolved as the result of the positions that other countries have taken.”

So was the military right to take over the Honduran government or should they have taken him to trial? Will other nations have an impact on the eventual outcome?