More Venezuelan sucess!

Originally posted by Merk
Would Venezuela be better off if America invaded?

Let's see...

2004: 29569 gun related deaths in the US.
That's about 81 a day...

GUN RELATED DEATHS... never mind stabbings, muggings, whatever else...

So no. It would seem that Venezuela is better off without the US invading.

Originally posted by shavixmir
Let's see...

2004: 29569 gun related deaths in the US.
That's about 81 a day...

GUN RELATED DEATHS... never mind stabbings, muggings, whatever else...

So no. It would seem that Venezuela is better off without the US invading.

Considering that Venezeulas population is about 5% of Americas, you might want to consider doing some math.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
I 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.

I htought you were just talking your opposition to the U.S. position on drug control. I didn't think you actually serious about drug laws being more important than the lives of Venezeulans.

Originally posted by Merk
I htought you were just talking your opposition to the U.S. position on drug control. I didn't think you actually serious about drug laws being more important than the lives of Venezeulans.

Their freedom and right to self-government are more important than their lives.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Their freedom and right to self-government are more important than their lives.

I happen to agree, but that's not what I was really asking.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
I'd say more like blaming Democrats or Republicans. Chavez is just one of a whole crew of socialists over there who ruined the country.

I think you and I both know the reasons for Venezula's demise are much more diverse than blaming a "crew of socialists". There's a slew of "capitalists" both within and from outside the country that could take their share of the blame.

To lay it all at the feet of a few is bad form.

Originally posted by Merk
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 g the heat in Colombia.


Would Venezuela be better off if America invaded?

TIME FOR A REALITY CHECK..........ONCE AGAIN

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.

WHAT'S THE ESTIMATE OF THE NUMBER OF IRAQI'S DEAD SINCE THE WAR STARTED....1 MILLION? POOR COMPARISON

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.

LIKE I SAID, ADD UP THE TOTALS INSTEAD OF TAKING 1 MONTH'S STATS OUT OF A 5 YEAR WAR.

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.

COURTESY OF CHAVEZ???? HYPERBOLE AT ITS BEST! CHAVEZ ISN'T DOING THE KILLING AND ISN'T SUPPORTING IT AND ISNT SENDING HIS TROOPS TO DO THE KILLING. ITS A PROBLEM ENDEMIC TO A POOR SOCIETY. COME ON NOW.

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.

35 NEEDLESS DEATHS ARE SOMEHOW BETTER THAN 63?? DUDE, THEIR BOTH BS!!!! NICE VIEW YOU HAVE THERE...."WELL, WE'RE ONLY INVOLVVED WITH 35 DEAD IRAQ'S SO WE ARE MORALLY SUPERIOR!!!"

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.

ONCE AGAIN, A PROBLEM LONG BEFORE CHAVEZ GOT INTO POWER. ROME WASN'T BUILT IN A DAY DUDE.

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.

SAME AS ABOVE. I LOVE HOW YOU PUT ALL PREVIOUSLY EXISTING PROBLEMS ON CHAVEZ'S SHOULDERS.

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.

OF COURSE PEOPLE FLEE FOR THEIR SAFETY...AS YOU'VE STATED, THINGS AREN'T GOING TOO WELL IN THE COUNTRY!!!!!!!!! SO WHAT ARE YOU SAYING HERE, DOCTORS SHOULDN'T BE SENT TO HELP THE POOR???? CRACKHEAD.

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.

TAKE A LOOK AT THE US'S CRIME SOLVING RATE AND THEN SHUT THE HELL UP. NEWS FLASH....MOST CRIMES ARE NOT SOLVED.

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.

WHOA, THIS IS SO FALSE I CAN'T EVEN BEGIN...LETS JUST SAY THIS IS RED HERRING COMPARISON. IF YOU'D LIKE, I'LL SEND YOU A FEW ARTICLES OUTLINING THE WHITE HOUSE COMPLAINING ABOUT HOW THE NEWS WAS BEING REPORTED BY "DISSIDENT" TV STATIONS AND OPPOSITIONJ POLITICIANS. MOVING ON....

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.

WHAT'S THIS? ARE YOU STARTING TO GET AT THE ROOT OF WHERE ALL THESE MURDERS ARE ACTUALLY COMING FROM? THE DRUG TRADE AS OPPOSED TO PEOPLE KILLING EACH OTHER BECAUSE THEIR LEADER DOESN'T CARE ABOUT THEM?? LET'S READ ON.

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.

GETTING CLOSER TO THE TRUTH HERE!

IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT VENEZULA CUT OFF THE DEA BECAUSE CHAVEZ WANTS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE US.

Would Venezuela be better off if America invaded?

NO, THE US SHOULD ADDRESS WHY SO MANY OF ITS CITIZENS ARE BUYING THESE DRUGS. STOP THE DEMAND AND YOU STOP THE SUPPLY.

YOU CAN'T BLAME VENEZULA FOR A SOCIETAL PROBLEM IN THE US. WHAT, ARE YOU GUYS SO EASILY CORRUPTED THAT YOU HAVE TO INVADE ANOTHER COUNTRY JUST TO GET YOUR OWN CITIZENS TO STOP SHOVING CHEMICALS UP THEIR NOSES????

MY WORK IS DONE HERE.

Originally posted by uzless
TIME FOR A REALITY CHECK..........ONCE AGAIN

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.

WHAT'S THE ESTIMATE OF THE N ...[text shortened]... NG CHEMICALS UP THEIR NOSES????

MY WORK IS DONE HERE.

Good try, but it doesn't change the fact that Iraq is a safer place to live than Venezeula, even though Iraq is the one that's a war zone.

Originally posted by Merk
Good try, but it doesn't change the fact that Iraq is a safer place to live than Venezeula, even though Iraq is the one that's a war zone.

The problems in venezula were there long before chavez got into power. It'll take decades to fix everything. Not sure why you can't get your head around that fact.

Why do you keep comparing it to Iraq? Iraq has nothing to do with venezula. In Iraq people are dying because the US took out their leader and the citizens have been rejecting the new leaders the US tried to put in its place.

Venezula is going through an internal battle dealing with drug lords and an economic collapse.

The 2 are not related.

It seems you are angry at some oof your own hollywood celebrities for citicizing your governments involvement in the problems in iraq. Direct your anger at them. Venezula will sort its problems out without the help of the US. It will be difficult and will take along time and it might even get worse before it gets better but it is their own problem. If they need help, they'll ask. They just don't want the US's help...with good reason perhaps given the inconsistent record of success during US interventions...but that's another story.

Give it a rest. Lay off Venezula.

Originally posted by uzless
The problems in venezula were there long before chavez got into power. It'll take decades to fix everything. Not sure why you can't get your head around that fact.

Why do you keep comparing it to Iraq? Iraq has nothing to do with venezula. In Iraq people are dying because the US took out their leader and the citizens have been rejecting the new leader ...[text shortened]... during US interventions...but that's another story.

Give it a rest. Lay off Venezula.

I don't blame it on Chavez. It was a hellhole long before he was elected.

Originally posted by uzless
The problems in venezula were there long before chavez got into power. It'll take decades to fix everything. Not sure why you can't get your head around that fact.

Why do you keep comparing it to Iraq? Iraq has nothing to do with venezula. In Iraq people are dying because the US took out their leader and the citizens have been rejecting the new leader ...[text shortened]... during US interventions...but that's another story.

Give it a rest. Lay off Venezula.

I didn't write the article. I just posted it. And I won't give Venezeula a rest.

Originally posted by Merk
I didn't write the article. I just posted it. And I won't give Venezeula a rest.

Well, don't post such trite...it gives the impression you agree with it. If you disagree with the articles, i'd suggest you state that at the beginning.

It makes you look like a crackpot if you don't say you disagree with it.

Originally posted by uzless
Well, don't post such trite...it gives the impression you agree with it. If you disagree with the articles, i'd suggest you state that at the beginning.

It makes you look like a crackpot if you don't say you disagree with it.

I do agree with it. Mostly. I don't like the fact that the article leads the reader to think Venezeula was fine before Chavez got there. But most of it I'm okay with.

Edit: The purpose of posting the article was to ask the question fo whether or not Venezeula would be safer if it was invaded. And to fire up some libs, I'll admit to that.

Originally posted by Merk
I do agree with it. Mostly. I don't like the fact that the article leads the reader to think Venezeula was fine before Chavez got there. But most of it I'm okay with.

Edit: The purpose of posting the article was to ask the question fo whether or not Venezeula would be safer if it was invaded. And to fire up some libs, I'll admit to that.

I'd like to see you read my debunk listed a few posts above and then tell us why you still agree with most of the article.

I won't rebuke or citicize you...just be interested to see what your thoughts are.