You've got millions fleeing the country, starving, looking for food, hyperinflation north of 1,000,000% and you ask me to prove Maduro and his Chavistas are not good?

Please, what a waste of time. I've actually spoken to real life Venezuelan refugees in my city. The Chavistas are scum who deserve torture.

Curunir, for the last time please stop conflating "not wanting to waste American lives and money in a yet another globalist intervention" with "supporting Maduro".

While you're here, Sams, could you provide us with a list of impoverished nations governed by meanies and the order in which you think they should be liberated with white lives and national debt?

(03-05-2019 05:45 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  While you're here, Sams, could you provide us with a list of impoverished nations governed by meanies and the order in which you think they should be liberated with white lives and national debt?

The ones with oil should be liberated with white lives and national debt.

(03-05-2019 02:18 AM)Samseau Wrote:  You've got millions fleeing the country, starving, looking for food, hyperinflation north of 1,000,000% and you ask me to prove Maduro and his Chavistas are not good?

Please, what a waste of time. I've actually spoken to real life Venezuelan refugees in my city. The Chavistas are scum who deserve torture.

"Mass mruder". By that reckoning your entire country should be fucked up the ass by Russia and China for what its done. That European crsis was set up by israel and you conducted the means to move them.

Where did the shit economy come from Samseau? It wasn't just stupidity from typical SA corruption that got them to this point.

Real life refugees huh? I've spoken with plenty of 'fugees in the UK and dont they all have sob stories? Fuck these guys dont even know their arse from their elbow and you believe them 100%?

Its funny how they weren't fucking off in droves when the going was good. They dont favour the regime and vice versa so ofcourse they're going to run but the government of Maduro isn't the one gutting and beheading people in the streets ala Mexico, thats a criminal problem.

I tend to believe that whatever Mike 'CIA' Pompeo and John 'Israel First' Bolton say on a matter is well crafted mainstream bullshit to start winding things up until it becomes a necessary choice to start shooting.

This isn't about shilling for Maduros obviously corrupt and stupid regime, it is about telling the bullshit from the truth.

Maduro is no mass murderer and believing sob stories from refugees only gives 1 half of the story.

Blowing up a country's economy is their own fault. They sit on piles of oil, no reason to starve. People are starving and eating food out of the trash. That's on the leader who robs his own country blind while the rest starve. He's a mass murderer who will go to hell.

Quote:While you're here, Sams, could you provide us with a list of impoverished nations governed by meanies and the order in which you think they should be liberated with white lives and national debt?

Spending a few million on bombs is far cheaper than the damage they do to us as migrants and refugees here, where each person ends up costing millions over their lifetime and vote in more Socialists. No thanks!! As long as we have open borders, any country creating refugees in South America is very much our concern.

(03-06-2019 04:01 AM)Samseau Wrote:  Spending a few million on bombs is far cheaper than the damage they do to us as migrants and refugees here, where each person ends up costing millions over their lifetime and vote in more Socialists. No thanks!! As long as we have open borders, any country creating refugees in South America is very much our concern.

You've got to be kidding. Building a wall, instituting e-verify and organizing some deportations costs literally 1% of a military intervention per country, and there are 30 countries in South America that might or might not someday require a military intervention.

If it wasn't for Venezuela being one of the few effective staging areas for an invasion of the USA, I would be all for leaving them alone completely.

Unfortunately, they are and the US must take the situation seriously. For all of America's stupid foreign wars and providing defense to other nations, this is the one case where the USA has a legitimate interest.

I will say that I do worry about Venezuela becoming a permanently failed state. It probably won't be too long before no US refineries are calibrated to buy their oil, and then the country's main source of revenue will be gone except maybe during another 1973/2008 style price spike. It's worth keeping in mind that even China will not buy their oil. Let's be honest: without oil it can never recover.

Would containment be an acceptable compromise?

Force the refugees, who overwhelmingly voted freely for this inevitable conclusion over 20 years ago and bitched and moaned about 2 coups to try to save them, to sleep in the bed that they made and block Russia, China, and Islamists from screwing around there. No one gets out or in. Otherwise, leave it alone.

(03-06-2019 07:57 AM)beta_plus Wrote:  If it wasn't for Venezuela being one of the few effective staging areas for an invasion of the USA, I would be all for leaving them alone completely.

Where did you hear this and why do you think it's not goofy propaganda from the same place that brought you "Weapons of Mass Destruction"?

There is no amalgamation to make between US military intervention in the middle east and US military intervention in the Americas.

The references should be more Panama and Grenada than Afghanistan and Iraq.

As the poster above I think military intervention in Venezuela would do great good to the region, capitalism and would greatly help Trump and conservatism in general.

This being said it would be way better of course if Maduro could fall by other means without any military intervention or loss of lives.

(03-06-2019 09:10 AM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

(03-06-2019 07:57 AM)beta_plus Wrote:  If it wasn't for Venezuela being one of the few effective staging areas for an invasion of the USA, I would be all for leaving them alone completely.

Where did you hear this and why do you think it's not goofy propaganda from the same place that brought you "Weapons of Mass Destruction"?

Monroe doctrine

(03-06-2019 07:57 AM)beta_plus Wrote:  If it wasn't for Venezuela being one of the few effective staging areas for an invasion of the USA, I would be all for leaving them alone completely.

USA is more likely to be invaded from Andromeda than from Venezuela.

(03-06-2019 12:32 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

(03-06-2019 07:57 AM)beta_plus Wrote:  If it wasn't for Venezuela being one of the few effective staging areas for an invasion of the USA, I would be all for leaving them alone completely.

USA is more likely to be invaded from Andromeda than from Venezuela.

Having a country where you can set up a base and operate from is more favourable than having to operate from a Navy when projecting power.

The threat isn't the Venezuelan military. It's countries like chyna trying to expand their power (who recently opened their first overseas base) taking advantage of the political instability of a country.

(03-06-2019 05:27 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

(03-06-2019 04:01 AM)Samseau Wrote:  Spending a few million on bombs is far cheaper than the damage they do to us as migrants and refugees here, where each person ends up costing millions over their lifetime and vote in more Socialists. No thanks!! As long as we have open borders, any country creating refugees in South America is very much our concern.

You've got to be kidding. Building a wall, instituting e-verify and organizing some deportations costs literally 1% of a military intervention per country, and there are 30 countries in South America that might or might not someday require a military intervention.

The wall isn't going to stop anything except allow a more orderly flow of migrants into America.

As soon as a Dem pres gets in, the wall is nothing more than decoration. Any executive action is just as easily undone.

The long term solution isn't pure isolation but actually try to help out neighboring countries without too much of a cost to oneself.

(03-04-2019 04:16 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Why anyone here shills for Venezuela is beyond me. He's a mass-murderer.

Not only do our allies, Brazil and Columbia, hate Venezuela, but the Chavistas are responsible for creating huge waves of refugees that are pushing northward into the USA.

He is a ruthless commie who deserves to be treated as he treats his people, with no mercy.

Drop a few hundred megaton bombs on his head. Let the right wingers take over the country and hopefully the people remain inside Venezuela instead of flooding our borders.

So we nuke Caracas, let unspecified "right-wingers" take over the country, and then hope that the flood of refugees stops?

This does not seem like a plan into which serious thought has been put.

(03-02-2019 01:27 PM)CaptainChardonnay Wrote:  

I can't listen to a guy with that hair, a goatee, and an unbuttoned shirt.

He probably meant "Soldiers Begin Defecating", being into weird shit himself.

(03-06-2019 10:19 PM)911 Wrote:  He probably meant "Soldiers Begin Defecating", being into weird shit himself.

It's a bad joke, but it's making fun of Hexenhammer, so I like it.

(03-06-2019 12:32 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

(03-06-2019 07:57 AM)beta_plus Wrote:  If it wasn't for Venezuela being one of the few effective staging areas for an invasion of the USA, I would be all for leaving them alone completely.

USA is more likely to be invaded from Andromeda than from Venezuela.

(03-06-2019 09:10 AM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

(03-06-2019 07:57 AM)beta_plus Wrote:  If it wasn't for Venezuela being one of the few effective staging areas for an invasion of the USA, I would be all for leaving them alone completely.

Where did you hear this and why do you think it's not goofy propaganda from the same place that brought you "Weapons of Mass Destruction"?

1. This Guy made me hear this and his goofy propaganda:











Sadly, I cannot find a video describing his observations that:
a. New Orleans is the one realistic place for a conventional military invasion of the USA. This can only be done by countries that border the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean. Venezuela borders the Caribbean.
b. When the UK desperately needed USA aid in WW II before Pearl Harbor, the USA gave the UK a bunch of destroyers and other aid. However, the UK had to give up all of its Western Hemisphere ports that they could use to invade the USA. The USA has a long history of keeping an eye on this stuff.

2. The Battle of New Orleans at the end of the War of 1812. Britain did not just randomly attack the mouth of the greatest collection of navigable inland waterways. Once America claimed New Orleans decisively, in addition to having St. Louis and Kansas City, it controlled the continent. As an American citizen, I wish for America to continue to do that.

3. Monroe Doctrine as mentioned above.

4. You guys might want to look at a topographical map of North America. New Orleans pops up as an obvious invasion spot.

Preventing a conventional military invasion or attack, no matter how unlikely, is within the legitimate interest of the American people.

Before you call me a globalist shill, I am for:

• abandoning all American military interventions and protections, including Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Germany, and Japan (the list is longer but you probably wouldn't read the names of 160+ countries).
• THE WALLS. With Mexico and Canada. Including US Navy patrols of the Great Lakes. Trump's failing to demand a wall with Canada is one of my greatest disappointments with him.
• shutting our borders to all non-tourists and tourists from places which I don't (and you probably don't and maybe some you do) like for the next 100 years.
  

However, even in that ideal world, the USA still needs to worry about:

• Canada and Mexico
• Any country bordering the Gulf of Mexico
• Any country bordering the Caribbean
  

When Maduro let Putin land nuclear capable bombers a few months ago, he crossed a very stupid line. A line that I wish that he would not have crossed so the USA could just tell Venezuela and its people "Fuck off, we don't need your oil anymore", but he did. He and Putin knew what they were doing. Damn it. And yes I'm aware it was probably Putin's retaliation for Syria and the Ukraine. Please look above.

As for containment, I should have been more clear that it should not be by American soldiers. At least from the forum and other places I looked, the citizens of Venezuela's neighbors would happily have its socialist/communist rapefugees kept in Venezuela by force. America could just send money, supplies, logistical aid, and intelligence to Venezuela's neighbors. I guess on the seas the USA would have to do that, though.

So your feeling is that we need to invade Venezuela because otherwise Russia will use it as a staging area to launch an invasion of the US mainland?

(03-07-2019 12:10 AM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  So your feeling is that we need to invade Venezuela because otherwise Russia will use it as a staging area to launch an invasion of the US mainland?

Thanks for intentionally misreading what I wrote now on more than one occasion. I am proposing CONTAINMENT. Not Invasion.

We need to keep a real politik/global political approach to Venezuela to prevent it from being used as a beach head against the USA. You might want to read up on the Cuban Missile Crisis.

We can keep the local actors working for us. Colombia, especially Colombian women, will happily support us if we approach this correctly.

Colombia:


Venezuela:

The motive for intervention hardly matters at this point.

I think there are a lot of people so desperate to believe in the prevailing strength of Western hegemony that they will push an invasion of someone, anyone, just to get that addict's hit of power and relevance.

I would have more respect for people that just admitted this shit openly rather than creating self-delusional fantasies about how they'll be welcomed with open arms as liberators. A fraction of the Western world even has the balls to concede that nations are not a product of their ideologies but of their people, at which point it becomes mind-numbingly obvious that you are in fact invading to save people not from socialism but from themselves.

So if you're going to colonize the savage apes and bring them civilisation in return for the valuable shit on their land or even the land itself as a potential "staging ground" then just bloody say it. An ugly truth is far more respectable than all these dirty and pathetic lies people are trying to peddle.

(03-07-2019 12:39 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  The motive for intervention hardly matters at this point.

I think there are a lot of people so desperate to believe in the prevailing strength of Western hegemony that they will push an invasion of someone, anyone, just to get that addict's hit of power and relevance.

I would have more respect for people that just admitted this shit openly rather than creating self-delusional fantasies about how they'll be welcomed with open arms as liberators. A fraction of the Western world even has the balls to concede that nations are not a product of their ideologies but of their people, at which point it becomes mind-numbingly obvious that you are in fact invading to save people not from socialism but from themselves.

So if you're going to colonize the savage apes and bring them civilisation in return for the valuable shit on their land or even the land itself as a potential "staging ground" then just bloody say it. An ugly truth is far more respectable than all these dirty and pathetic lies people are trying to peddle.

Well ...

yeah ...

... I thought that's what I just said.

My only caveat is that I'm going to use whatever nasty means necessary to make the impact on my own people minimal. If hot Colombian chicks don't want to compete with hot Venezuelan rapefugee chicks, I am going to use that to my people's advantage.

Mr. Zeihan has to package things nicely in order to make a living.

I wasn't referring specifically to your post. I typed it before you posted your message and it only showed up on my feed after I hit post.

What does "containment" mean in this context? Venezeula isn't an expansionistic power. They're not going to invade Columbia. They have no designs on their neighbors. They can barely keep their lights on. What are we supplying "logistical support" to neighboring countries FOR? Those neighboring countries have already ruled out military invasion.

Also, this is the third time in something like 12 hours that some generic conservabro on RVF has told me to "read up on (famous event from American history that everybody knows about)" Is this the latest basic bitch conservative talking point?