2007-03-12 02:21:32 · 9 answers · asked by trouble maker 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Well there is a lot of oil in Venezuela and we know he is a thief. To be honest I think it would have been far more sensible to have invaded south america instead of the middle east. It's much easier to control somewhere that is close to your own country. Instead of manufacturing the war on terror (which anyway didn't fit in with Iraq as there were no terrorists there before the yanks went in and turned it into a land grab) they should have stuck with the good old fight the commies. Imagine, communism is sweeping through south america good old uncle sam better go in and bomb the hell out of the civilian population then steal all of the oil!!!
In fact, I reckon the US could even get away with invading and keeping the whole of south america so why not? Do they really hate latinos and mexicans so much? How about a bit of biological warfare to wipe them out first? Worked with the red skins...
2007-03-12 02:46:15 · answer #1 · answered by airmonkey1001 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't think Bush has the support for operation Venezuela. Unfortunately the people of Venezuela will be sold down the road of Chavez style dictatorship. Thousands of the professional class have already left that increasingly marxist country. The rate of poverty in Venezuela is increasing, unemployment is going up, the free press and opposition to Chavez has been silenced. The question should not be what will the US and Bush do about the enslavement of the Venezuelan people. The question should be is there a Venezuelan counterpart to Pinochet that will save that country from the oppression and poverty a far left government always brings
2007-03-12 02:36:21 · answer #2 · answered by espreses@sbcglobal.net 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hugo Chavez poses a minor threat to the U.S. right now. Im sure Bush has no interest in "invading venezuela".
2007-03-12 02:30:56 · answer #3 · answered by panthrchic 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
on the instant up: US on all of them, hands down. familiar conflict purely: US might win Iran, Syria, Venezuela, and conflict, yet defeat Russia. US might win North Korea in the event that they have been continual sufficient. you spot, NK is like Japan on the top of WWII, wherein each final guy, female, and newborn feared seize via the U. S. extra effective than loss of life. hence, they have been arranged to take on the U. S. with pointed sticks if choose be. comparable element applies to NK, ought to the U. S. care to spend the money and lives to do it, they might beat NK, yet at a extensive fee and all yet completely wipe out the inhabitants of NK. it is likewise assuming that all the fights are one on one as you assert.
2016-11-24 22:08:37 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Venezuela is no threat to the USA, and Bush would be wise to leave them alone. I doubt Americans want us to fight another war.
Most of the people are great people, plus they send us oil.
2007-03-12 02:24:25 · answer #5 · answered by Villain 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I am not sure. Why bother they should just send in Sam Fisher for Chavez.
2007-03-12 02:24:06 · answer #6 · answered by True Patriot 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We don't NEED anyone's f*cken support you America-hater! We actually will just laugh him out of existence, the fat-lipped clown!
And no one 'sends' us oil, we $$$$ BUY $$$$ it!!!!!!!
Imbeciles!!!
2007-03-12 02:30:55 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Doesn't need it; we're just gonna laugh Hugo out of existance.
2007-03-12 02:25:24 · answer #8 · answered by wizjp 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
no, just bomb them silly...
we have not enough military to fight in Iraq and you want to start another war? well ..good luck
Hitler did the same thing when he attacked Russia ...duh
Napoleon too
2007-03-12 02:27:45 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋