A laser guided missile would be more efficient, and save the trouble of inserting a sniper.Commie Killer wrote:
This guy really needs a .50BMG round through his head.
- Superior Mind
- (not macbeth)
- +1,755|7140
Ah... Río de la Plata. I remember crossing that body of water....anyway back on topic. He'll get his in due time I suppose.
Last edited by Superior Mind (2007-03-14 13:14:37)
*shrugs* Chavez isn't really any worse than a lot of South American leaders... He's just more vocal than most. We spent a good portion of the 80s fucking with Central and South America, and we still mess with Columbia in our mostly futile War on Drugs, so if Chavez wants to capitalize on the rising sentiment against Bush and America in general, I can't really say that I blame him.
Of course, he and a lot of South America make America look saintly by comparison, when it comes to corruption....
Of course, he and a lot of South America make America look saintly by comparison, when it comes to corruption....
Wow, just looking at the posts on this thread. Are we suggesting we invade Venezuela because he has been bad mouthing the US? By that logic Iran would be fully justified in invading the US would they not?
Now if we're suggesting Venezuela be invaded because he has started to develop his military capabilities we have to admit that if you look at the documentary cited by CameronPoe (http://www.chavezthefilm.com/html/home.htm) Chavez has a real reason to do so, he was almost overthrown illegally once before as a result of externally supported coup leaders.
From what I've seen and heard from Chavez I like him but he seems to be a very contentious figure. He only first came to my attention in the media when he nationalised the Venezuelan oil supplies, since then he's been painted out to be more and more of a demon in the media ...coincidence? I've spoken to South Americans about him and I've found this: Spanish South Americans and middle class or wealthy South Americans think he's the anti-Christ whereas native South Americans and working class South Americans seem to have a lot more time for him.
He's made out to be some sort of dictator and yet he is in office by democratic election. There have been accusations from many US news sources that the election was not fully transparent but the same thing was said about Bush's first term in office was it not? He has been defended by former US president Jimmy Carter and the United nations have no real beef with him so far (as far I know, I've run searches and found nothing, please feel free to correct me if I've missed anything).
On the face of things it seems like people here are suggesting Venezuela be invaded simply because Chavez is positioned on the left of the political spectrum. Must every country in the world be fully aligned on the right with the US in order to exist without fear of attack? If so this would back up my personal theory that the US is a de facto 'empire' that extends right around the world from South America to Eastern Europe and beyond where anyone who expresses discontent with their 'rulers' is punished severely.
Now if we're suggesting Venezuela be invaded because he has started to develop his military capabilities we have to admit that if you look at the documentary cited by CameronPoe (http://www.chavezthefilm.com/html/home.htm) Chavez has a real reason to do so, he was almost overthrown illegally once before as a result of externally supported coup leaders.
From what I've seen and heard from Chavez I like him but he seems to be a very contentious figure. He only first came to my attention in the media when he nationalised the Venezuelan oil supplies, since then he's been painted out to be more and more of a demon in the media ...coincidence? I've spoken to South Americans about him and I've found this: Spanish South Americans and middle class or wealthy South Americans think he's the anti-Christ whereas native South Americans and working class South Americans seem to have a lot more time for him.
He's made out to be some sort of dictator and yet he is in office by democratic election. There have been accusations from many US news sources that the election was not fully transparent but the same thing was said about Bush's first term in office was it not? He has been defended by former US president Jimmy Carter and the United nations have no real beef with him so far (as far I know, I've run searches and found nothing, please feel free to correct me if I've missed anything).
On the face of things it seems like people here are suggesting Venezuela be invaded simply because Chavez is positioned on the left of the political spectrum. Must every country in the world be fully aligned on the right with the US in order to exist without fear of attack? If so this would back up my personal theory that the US is a de facto 'empire' that extends right around the world from South America to Eastern Europe and beyond where anyone who expresses discontent with their 'rulers' is punished severely.
I've actually been in Caracas during a coup attempt. Scary shit to be honest. Early 90's.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
The tutor I had for my thesis when I was studying for my degree was very good friends with the Irish documentary team that filmed the documentary cited in this thread (http://www.chavezthefilm.com/html/home.htm). I recommend anyone who enjoys the D&ST watch it, it's very interesting, it looked as though the film crew were probably going to make a fairly biased portrait film of Chavez but ended up playing a vital part in the reinstatement of Chavez as the rightful head of state. It is proof of how careful the public have to be as regards what they believe to be true or false in the media. Everything is not always as it seems.
Braddock do you think Chavez is responding and acting in the best interest of the people he is serving right now?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I think Chavez was right to take control of the oil supplies of the nation instead of letting big multi-nationals walk out with the profits. I admire his position on housing for the poorer elements of society and though I'm not a fan of arms races I wouldn't criticise him too harshly for building military capabilities after what was attempted on him before (if he started talking about nukes I would be more concerned). I know people have accused him of muzzling opponents and distorting voting polls but at the same time I can only give these accusations a certain amount of credence as he is an opponent of globalisation and thus is bound to invite criticism (be it warranted or unwarranted) from certain elements in the Western world. I admire him for going against the grain, unlike Argentina and Chile who were shafted by globalisation Chavez is brave enough to try a different approach where you look out for yourself first and then worry about the super powers.kmarion wrote:
Braddock do you think Chavez is responding and acting in the best interest of the people he is serving right now?
I gotta dash for now as I've a bus to catch, I'll pick this up later kmarion (just incase you think I'm avoiding you or anything like that!).
Of course not, your not one of "the avoiders"..lol Cya laterBraddock wrote:
I gotta dash for now as I've a bus to catch, I'll pick this up later kmarion (just incase you think I'm avoiding you or anything like that!).
Xbone Stormsurgezz
A different approach is something I can approve too. The nationalization of natural resources and the opposition to the globalization efforts of the US are also good things.Braddock wrote:
I think Chavez was right to take control of the oil supplies of the nation instead of letting big multi-nationals walk out with the profits. I admire his position on housing for the poorer elements of society and though I'm not a fan of arms races I wouldn't criticise him too harshly for building military capabilities after what was attempted on him before (if he started talking about nukes I would be more concerned). I know people have accused him of muzzling opponents and distorting voting polls but at the same time I can only give these accusations a certain amount of credence as he is an opponent of globalisation and thus is bound to invite criticism (be it warranted or unwarranted) from certain elements in the Western world. I admire him for going against the grain, unlike Argentina and Chile who were shafted by globalisation Chavez is brave enough to try a different approach where you look out for yourself first and then worry about the super powers.kmarion wrote:
Braddock do you think Chavez is responding and acting in the best interest of the people he is serving right now?
I gotta dash for now as I've a bus to catch, I'll pick this up later kmarion (just incase you think I'm avoiding you or anything like that!).
But NEVER at the cost of democracy. Chavez's housing and other projects are intended to guarantee support of the lower classes, which are the majority in Venezuela. Chavez has closed down Venezuela's largest TV broadcaster, because they didn't favor him. Imagine what he can/has done to smaller newspapers/readios/magazines that oppose him.
Chavez political manipulations to maintain power stink, and in light of that one can only question his real motives to make such grand speechs on the nationalization of oil and the arming of his country.
"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them."
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
ignorant assMissionless wrote:
lol dont like US, get invaded. thats all these Americans do,
Malloy must go
I'm no fan of censorship but it was a privately owned TV station that almost illegally toppled the Chavez's administration by broadcasting a complete mis-representation of a riot thus instigating a coup (http://www.chavezthefilm.com/html/home.htm), and all with the backing of the US it would seem. I'd want to see all sides of that story before immediately renouncing it as muzzling of the media.EVieira wrote:
Chavez has closed down Venezuela's largest TV broadcaster, because they didn't favor him. Imagine what he can/has done to smaller newspapers/readios/magazines that oppose him.
As regards housing projects intended to maintain the support of a working class majority, well that's just what politicians do, try to satisfy their voters and maintain their support (nothing sinister there). If he were a dictator in the typical sense and was exploiting his nations wealth for his own ends and starving and neglecting his people I'd be extremely critical of the man but he doesn't seem to be doing that. He's not without fault but he's by no means a tyrant compared to many of the world's leaders.
How come we don't here as much about these kinds of Chavez stories? http://news.independent.co.uk/world/ame … 333837.ece
Call it cynical 'publicity stunt politics' but it sure beats starving your citizens and spouting a desire for nuclear weapons.
bush has less than two years. what will bozo chavez do after that?
With a little luck the new American Administration might not have anything for 'bozo chavez' to complain about. Chavez is just doing what Bush does. Bush goes round the world criticising 'regimes' that don't fit in with his political ideology, that's what Chavez is doing except he is on the left instead of the right. He's stepping up his rhetoric at the moment because Bush is in his neighbourhood, would Bush remain silent if Chavez were doing a tour of Mexico and Canada?GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
bush has less than two years. what will bozo chavez do after that?
I think if someone gets into power in the U.S. who isnt aggressive to Venezuela he will shut up and concern himself with helping the poor in his country and implementing his socialist revolution. Bush started all the hostilities there is no reason to think Chavez will continue his belligerence if a more rational, moderate administration is elected in 2008. As for the OP, maybe if you studied the history of U.S. intervention in Latin America since 1900 and learned first hand all the brutal dictators the U.S. funded you would understand where Chavez is coming from and why he is so popular. I don't agree with his suspension of the constitution to implement his socialist revolution, but at least he had the consent of the governed before he did it. Bush had no popular consent before he started tearing up the U.S constitution.
Read it again, I said "I really don't mean it", it was just a joke. I don't want US to really invade Venezuela, but Chavez is still a clown. And learn your facts right, he led a coup back in 92. He is an asshole dictator.JimmyBotswana wrote:
I think if someone gets into power in the U.S. who isnt aggressive to Venezuela he will shut up and concern himself with helping the poor in his country and implementing his socialist revolution. Bush started all the hostilities there is no reason to think Chavez will continue his belligerence if a more rational, moderate administration is elected in 2008. As for the OP, maybe if you studied the history of U.S. intervention in Latin America since 1900 and learned first hand all the brutal dictators the U.S. funded you would understand where Chavez is coming from and why he is so popular. I don't agree with his suspension of the constitution to implement his socialist revolution, but at least he had the consent of the governed before he did it. Bush had no popular consent before he started tearing up the U.S constitution.
Last edited by sergeriver (2007-03-20 13:35:52)
When Mercenaries 2 comes out at the end of this year, you guys can ALL invade Venezuela all you want!!!
Hugo Chavez= cum stain on Monica's dress. . . .
Hugo Chavez= cum stain on Monica's dress. . . .
Last edited by fadedsteve (2007-03-20 17:28:46)
Yeah but Chavez would take Bush in a fist fight!fadedsteve wrote:
Hugo Chavez= cum stain on Monica's dress. . . .