Is Venezuela's Chavez a threat to American National Security?

kaya'08 · Jul 17, 2012

Presumptive US Republican candidate for this year’s presidential elections, Mitt Romney, has branded Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez a threat to US national security and accused the leader of Venezuelan’s Bolivarian revolution of “spreading dictatorships and tyranny throughout Latin America”.

The former Massachusetts’s governor was responding to comments made by President Obama, who had stated that Chavez did not pose a “serious threat” to the US on Tuesday. Speaking to Fox news channel the following day, Romney said that he had been “shocked and stunned” by Obama’s statements and branded them “naive”.

Mitt Romney: Venezuela

Do you agree with Romney that Chavez poses a direct national security threat to the U.S.A, or do you think this is nothing more than fear mongering against socialism in Latin America that shouldn't be taken so seriously?

This story has been posted elsewhere on this forum but i am seeking to establish consensus amongst American users on DP through the use of a poll, to see if they agree or disagree with Mitt.

Ikari · Jul 17, 2012

Not in the least. Are we going to start a two front war then if we get Romney? One in the Middle East, one in Central/South America? Well at least that one will be in the same hemisphere.

Sarcogito · Jul 17, 2012

Despite the fear mongering, I can't think of anyone who poses a risk to our (U.S.A) national security at the moment.

Ikari · Jul 17, 2012

Sarcogito said:
Despite the fear mongering, I can't think of anyone who poses a risk to our (U.S.A) national security at the moment.

What about them thar mexican'ts? Why they're all illegal immigrants looking to subvert America I tellz you!

rathi · Jul 17, 2012

Chavez is annoying, but little more than that.

jamesrage · Jul 17, 2012

No he is not a threat to the US.Whether or not he is a threat to the other South American countries has nothing to do with us.

Smart · Jul 17, 2012

Hugo Chavez is not a dictator and he's not a threat to us or to neighboring countries.

Why is it that America needs to bully Latin-American nations who choose Socialism over Capitalism?

Hatuey · Jul 17, 2012

jamesrage said:
Whether or not he is a threat to the other South American countries has nothing to do with us.

That's debatable considering the amount of ressources we buy from those countries and the amount of **** they buy from us. A threat to my customers, is not a direct threat to me - but it is a threat none the less.

Smart · Jul 17, 2012

Hatuey said:
That's debatable considering the amount of ressources we buy from those countries and the amount of **** they buy from us. A threat to my customers, is not a direct threat to me - but it is a threat none the less.

Are you sure you're not a Ferengi?

johnny_rebson · Jul 17, 2012

If we overthrow Chavez, who can we replace him with?

ecofarm · Jul 18, 2012

johnny_rebson said:
If we overthrow Chavez, who can we replace him with?

Isn't there a Jong available? They look similar and they both like Iran.

johnny_rebson · Jul 18, 2012

ecofarm said:
Isn't there a Jong available? They look similar and they both like Iran.

We want our guy to like Saudi Arabia, not Iran.

LibertyBurns · Jul 18, 2012

johnny_rebson said:
We want our guy to like Saudi Arabia, not Iran.

Which is stupid, Saudis are way worse than Iranians. Where were most of the 9/11 terrorist from? Yes yes, damn Saudis in their Audis...

Anyway, I bet a 100 bucks we have more friends in Iran than we do in Saudi Arabia, not in government, I mean the people. Though we are going to push the people away with our policies of course, right into the arms of their government.

Robert Baer has a good video from PBS stating about how the shiites are more catholic like in islam and the sunnis are more like the protestants. Meaning they shiites(iran) are more structured, unlike the more radical less centralized sunnis(saudi), which can be more dangerous.

Edit:

Pretty sure you were joking but, just in case eh

cpwill · Jul 18, 2012

Sarcogito said:
Despite the fear mongering, I can't think of anyone who poses a risk to our (U.S.A) national security at the moment.

That seems like you are setting a pretty high bar for Risk to National Security.

There are plenty of threat forces out there. Chavez is definitely one of them.

Thunder · Jul 18, 2012

if we actually invaded Venezuela, I would expect our troops to commit mutiny.

cpwill · Jul 18, 2012

Thunder said:
if we actually invaded Venezuela, I would expect our troops to commit mutiny.

what? why in the hell would we do that?

and why does anything think that being identified as a threat force means invasion? hell, Russia, China, Iran, Syria, North Korea are all threat forces; we aren't invading any of them. It just means we recognize what they are and work to mitigate / negate their effects

Thunder · Jul 18, 2012

cpwill said:
what? why in the hell would we do that?...

cause it would be a stupid war, unworthy of fighting.

cpwill · Jul 18, 2012

Thunder said:
cause it would be a stupid war, unworthy of fighting.

That is not a decision for members of the military to make, and I would woefully either arrest or shoot any of my brothers and sisters who attempted to do so.

Thunder · Jul 18, 2012

cpwill said:
That is not a decision for members of the military to make, and I would woefully either arrest or shoot any of my brothers and sisters who attempted to do so.

no, we are obliged to resist illegal orders, including orders to fight an illegal war.

without an act of war against us or them planning to attack us, an attack on Venezuela would be an illegal act of aggression.

cpwill · Jul 19, 2012

Thunder said:
no, we are obliged to resist illegal orders, including orders to fight an illegal war.

We are obliged not to follow illegal orders. "Stupid" orders are just fine. I've followed lots of orders I thought were stupid. The President of the United States has the power to send the military anywhere he wants for 90 days without Congressional approval (and the current occupant of Pennsylvania Avenue does not seem to think he needs even that), and off we go, regardless of whether or not you think the mission "worthy". Illegal Orders are those that violate the Laws of Armed Conflict or the laws of the force-nation, none of which say that any member of the military is to refuse to invade a nation because they disagree with the reasoning behind the invasion.

without an act of war against us or them planning to attack us, an attack on Venezuela would be an illegal act of aggression.

Aggressive yes, illegal no.

Thunder · Jul 19, 2012

cpwill said:
We are obliged not to follow illegal orders.....

same thing.

RGacky3 · Jul 19, 2012

That is not a decision for members of the military to make, and I would woefully either arrest or shoot any of my brothers and sisters who attempted to do so.

It is EVERY humans duty to act within their conscience ...

Cardinal Fang · Jul 19, 2012

cpwill said:
That seems like you are setting a pretty high bar for Risk to National Security. There are plenty of threat forces out there. Chavez is definitely one of them.

No doubt! Never trust a guy who would send tens of millions of gallons of free home heating oil to thousands of poor families freezing across the northern tier of the USA. He's obviously up to something shifty there...

Cardinal Fang · Jul 19, 2012

cpwill said:
That is not a decision for members of the military to make, and I would woefully either arrest or shoot any of my brothers and sisters who attempted to do so.

LOL! Thinking like that got a lot of people fragged in Nam...

cpwill · Jul 20, 2012

Cardinal Fang said:
No doubt! Never trust a guy who would send tens of millions of gallons of free home heating oil to thousands of poor families freezing across the northern tier of the USA. He's obviously up to something shifty there...

:shrug: and Commodus gave out bread to the poor.

Incidentally, I tried to look up that free heating oil. I didn't find anything on that, though I did find this:

To Power Syria, Chávez Sends Diesel

July 9 2012

Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez and his state-oil company are providing vital energy support to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and conducting business with Syrian firms blacklisted by Washington and Brussels, according to documents relating to the deals.

That puts Venezuela alongside Russia and Iran in an informal bloc of nations working to stymie the West's efforts to topple Mr. Assad and break up his military alliance with Iran, U.S. officials and Syrian activists say.

The support centers on diesel fuel sent by Venezuela to Syria, shipments that officials from both sides of the trade have publicly confirmed. But the deals are structured to bring other benefits, including shielding Syria's dwindling foreign-exchange reserves, the documents show...

Diesel is crucial for powering Syrian tanks and other military vehicles that are driving Damascus's continuing crackdown on Mr. Assad's political opponents. Even by conserative estimates, more than 10,000 Syrians have been killed by Damascus's security forces since the uprising against his regime began 18 months ago.

"The huge movements of tanks and heavy armor require an enormous amount of heavy diesel," said Louay Sakkar of the Syrian Support Group, an activist organization calling for greater support for Syria's rebel army. "It's like the lifeblood of the killing regime."

Venezuela and its state oil company have defended its rights to sell diesel to Syria. President Chávez has trumpeted his support for Iran and Syria as part of his desire to build an "anti-imperial" coalition of countries fighting what he calls American hegemony...

Yeah, this guy is a no-goodnick.

Is Venezuela's Chavez a threat to American National Security?