http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=284342916957156
Warfare: Quick, which nation shows average civilian deaths at 33 a day in the last third of 2007? Now name the one where civilian deaths average 19 a day? If you guessed Iraq and Venezuela, you'd have it backward.
Shocking? Of course. But true. With even Venezuelan officials admitting their country clocked 12,249 murders in 2007, Hugo Chavez's socialist "sea of happiness" resembles a war zone. In December alone, Venezuela had 670 murders while Iraq had 476 — and that number is falling fast.
This is Hugo Chavez's Venezuela, the place wildly praised by Hollywood eminentos like Oliver Stone and Sean Penn, and its crime is so bad it tops that seen in actual warfare.
People like Stone and Penn frequently criticize the Iraq war effort and its progress toward peace. But not once have we seen any of them express outrage at the slaughter brought to the streets of Venezuela courtesy of Hugo Chavez, a supposed champion of the poor.
Some champion. On Jan. 1, around the same time Hollywood film director Oliver Stone was loudly praising Chavez's revolution in Caracas, 63 murders started off Venezuela's New Year; 35 died the same day in Iraq.
Stone probably knows this, because anyone who's ever been to Caracas knows all about the severity of the crime. Venezuela is the kind of place where families around the dinner table discuss kidnapping and make pacts to not pay ransom for fear of bankrupting the family.
Meanwhile, night travel is strongly discouraged and no one wears jewelry openly. Security guards pack big firepower to guard tiny businesses like bakeries, and bulletproof cars are common.
Cuban doctors sent for propaganda purposes to help the poor often flee for their safety, leaving boarded up "free" health care kiosks in Caracas slums like Petare and Catia.
It's not just that there are a lot of crimes. There's also a lot of getting away with it. The government, starting to feel heat from the locals over crime, particularly after El Mundo reported the figures, is on the defensive, saying it's busy solving the crimes.
But most violent crimes go unsolved because the Chavez government is more interested in pursuing "political" crimes — like persecuting dissident TV stations and opposition politicians — than hunting down the thugs who make Venezuela less safe than Iraq.
The root of the problem isn't just in a government unwilling to catch crooks, but also in Venezuela's growing geographical role as the drug transshipment point to Europe.
Eighty percent of the cocaine reaching Europe via the Spanish and Italian coasts comes from Venezuela. Yet Venezuela cut off all cooperation with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration in 2005, leaving it open to pressure from drug gangs escaping the heat in Colombia.
Would Venezuela be better off if America invaded?
Originally posted by MerkDo you know what Venezula was like before Chavez? That's like blaming the next US president for having troops in Iraq.
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=284342916957156
Warfare: Quick, which nation shows average civilian deaths at 33 a day in the last third of 2007? Now name the one where civilian deaths average 19 a day? If you guessed Iraq and Venezuela, you'd have it backward.
Shocking? Of course. But true. With even Venezuelan officials admitting their ...[text shortened]... g the heat in Colombia.
Would Venezuela be better off if America invaded?
Originally posted by MerkWhy not let the Europeans worry about that. Coming from an administration that wanted a kill switch on the galileo positioning system, which was intended for use not only by commercial users but by emergency services (rescue chopper on the way... oh hang on, the US got jumpy and now Europeans have to die needlesly) I think the DEA did not exactly have Europes interests at heart in that case...
...but also in Venezuela's growing geographical role as the drug transshipment point to Europe.
Eighty percent of the cocaine reaching Europe via the Spanish and Italian coasts comes from Venezuela. Yet Venezuela cut off all cooperation with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration in 2005, leaving it open to pressure from drug gangs escaping the heat in Colombia.
Would Venezuela be better off if America invaded?
Originally posted by MerkNo, because then their policy or respecting the individual's right to buy, sell, and use drugs would be squashed by force of arms. Not acceptable.
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=284342916957156
Warfare: Quick, which nation shows average civilian deaths at 33 a day in the last third of 2007? Now name the one where civilian deaths average 19 a day? If you guessed Iraq and Venezuela, you'd have it backward.
Shocking? Of course. But true. With even Venezuelan officials admitting their ...[text shortened]... g the heat in Colombia.
Would Venezuela be better off if America invaded?
Legalize cocaine and Venezuela's income and socialist regime would collapse. The USA especially is giving these fools a monopoly on an extraordinarily desired and valuable product. It's idiocy. Why are we suppressing their competition?
Originally posted by uzlessYeah, it was an amazingly powerful oil based economy until the public spending started in the 70's and early 80's, sending Venezuela into the sick situation it's in now. Chavez is just doing what had already been done and which led to the country's collapse.
Do you know what Venezula was like before Chavez? That's like blaming the next US president for having troops in Iraq.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungWhat does the illegality of cocaine in the U.S. have to do with violence in Venezuela?
No, because then their policy or respecting the individual's right to buy, sell, and use drugs would be squashed by force of arms. Not acceptable.
Legalize cocaine and Venezuela's income and socialist regime would collapse. The USA especially is giving these fools a monopoly on an extraordinarily desired and valuable product. It's idiocy. Why are we suppressing their competition?
Originally posted by agrysonGalileo is about GPS weapon sales. Every other use is a byproduct. As it sits, EU countries can't export GPS weapons because they rely on the U.S. system. Once Europe has it's own, then they can export GPS weapons.
Why not let the Europeans worry about that. Coming from an administration that wanted a kill switch on the galileo positioning system, which was intended for use not only by commercial users but by emergency services (rescue chopper on the way... oh hang on, the US got jumpy and now Europeans have to die needlesly) I think the DEA did not exactly have Europes interests at heart in that case...
More importantly, how in the hell did you go from reading a post about how Venezuela is a bigger cesspool than a third world war zone, and begin crying about U.S. actions toward European GPS?
Originally posted by AThousandYoungIt's not suggested that we send troops, nor that they would be there for the drugs.
When American troops are being suggested as a way to suppress the drug industry in, and enforce cooperation with the DEA by, Venezuela such a connection magically appears.
It's an article that shows Iraq is less violent than Venezuela and me asking the if Venezuela would be better off if it suffered the same fate as Iraq.
Originally posted by MerkGiven that you copy and pasted the article here, and that the last line (psychologically more influential than a line in the middle according to Dr. Cornelius, my Psych 101 professor with the perverted stories and spit flicking lower lip)
It's not suggested that we send troops, nor that they would be there for the drugs.
It's an article that shows Iraq is less violent than Venezuela and me asking the if Venezuela would be better off if it suffered the same fate as Iraq.
...umm, anyway, the last two sentences are:
Eighty percent of the cocaine reaching Europe via the Spanish and Italian coasts comes from Venezuela. Yet Venezuela cut off all cooperation with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration in 2005, leaving it open to pressure from drug gangs escaping the heat in Colombia.
Given this inclusion of yours, and the fact that their government was democratically elected (wasn't it? Don't know actually) I think a US invasion is a bad idea.
Wait...how do you invade without troops?
Originally posted by AThousandYounghow do you invade without troops?
Given that you copy and pasted the article here, and that the last line (psychologically more influential than a line in the middle according to Dr. Cornelius, my Psych 101 professor with the perverted stories and spit flicking lower lip)
...umm, anyway, the last two sentences are:
Eighty percent of the cocaine reaching Europe via the Spanish ...[text shortened]... w actually) I think a US invasion is a bad idea.
Wait...how do you invade without troops?
How long is a Chinaman?
The question is would Venezeula be better off if America invaded?
No more singling out one sentence, ignoring all other sentences and proclaiming it the hypothetical purpose of the non existent invasion. The comparison is between the violence levels of the two countries.
Originally posted by MerkI said Venezuela would not be better if America invaded and I gave reasons. You're the one asking about a US invasion of Venezuela and suggesting it would not involve US troops.
[b]how do you invade without troops?
How long is a Chinaman?
The question is would Venezeula be better off if America invaded?
No more singling out one sentence, ignoring all other sentences and proclaiming it the hypothetical purpose of the non existent invasion. The comparison is between the violence levels of the two countries.[/b]