Are we headed to yet another war?

[PsyOps]

Venezuela Moves 10 Tank Battalions to Colombian Border

A top general said Wednesday that Venezuela has nearly completed its deployment of thousands of troops to states along the border with Colombia.

"Between 85 and 90 percent of the troops are situated," Gen. Jesus Gonzalez Gonzalez told reporters at a news conference, saying soldiers were largely sent to the border states of Zulia, Tachira and Apure.

Venezuela's military mobilization includes air, land and sea forces in Colombia dispute, Reuters reports.

Bush is denouncing Venezuela's actions and voices his support for Columbia.

 

[RadioPatrol]

Venezuela Moves 10 Tank Battalions to Colombian Border

Nuke Yugo Chavez and the problem is over ............

 

[aps45819]

Nuke Yugo Chavez and the problem is over ............

I think we'll have to slap him before the summer is over.

 

[LordStanley]

I think we'll have to slap him before the summer is over.

a couple JDAMS into his house would take care of it

 

[tommyjones]

Nuke Yugo Chavez and the problem is over ............

and you wonder why people hate americans?

 

[High EGT]

Well this seals the deal for 4 $ a gallon gas.

 

[Bustem' Down]

Well this seals the deal for 4 $ a gallon gas.

What is gas in MD. I'm paying 3.33 on base here in SoCal.

 

[PsyOps]

Well this seals the deal for 4 $ a gallon gas.

It doesn't have to be that way. We are sitting on so much oil and the environmentalists and liberals won let us drill. We could become completely oil independent. The US purchases 60% of the oil exported from Venezuela. We could single-handedly cripple the Venezuelan economy and this military threat would be over quickly. Their oil is 80% of their economy. It's an outrage to point our critical finger at Chavez while keeping them number 3 on our list of largest oil importers.

 

[PsyOps]

What is gas in MD. I'm paying 3.33 on base here in SoCal.

I think it's around $3.12

 

[Pete]

Nuke Yugo Chavez and the problem is over ............

This is not true. South and Central America have ALWAYS had socialist guerilla movements. The reason is despite having abundant natural resources over half the population of almost every country lives in total poverty. I am not talking "American poverty" where you are considered poor if you do not have 2 cars and a TV over 27 inches, I mean eating dirt poor. The elites and corrupt governments down there do in fact keep them in squalor.

USA Today showed a chart of Ecuador, Columbia and Venezuela, total populations and percentage of the pop living in poverty and it was astounding. The deal is that the socialist countries leaders promise a bunch but STILL keep the poor beat down.

Look at Mexico, they have oil, produce, agriculture, tequila, tourism and a grunch of manufacturing jobs since NAFTA yet a third of their population still eats bugs and lizards to survive. Why is it that Mexico is not a warmer version of the USA? Corruption, that is why.

It will continue to be the same way it has been for a century. Thugs under slightly different banners vying to be in charge on the backs of their populations. If Chavez was the socialist hero he claims to be 45% of the population surely wouldn't be living in poverty.

 

[awpitt]

It doesn't have to be that way. We are sitting on so much oil and the environmentalists and liberals won let us drill. We could become completely oil independent. The US purchases 60% of the oil exported from Venezuela. We could single-handedly cripple the Venezuelan economy and this military threat would be over quickly. Their oil is 80% of their economy. It's an outrage to point our critical finger at Chavez while keeping them number 3 on our list of largest oil importers.

I know what you mean about us continuing to import oil from them while pointing fingers and I'm all for drilling and find our own sources of oil but I don't know that there's as much there as we would hope. People talk about ANWR as if it could supply us all of our needs forever but that's not the case. I know there are reports out there saying all sorts of different things about ANWR and that's the problem. No one knows.

The U.S. consumes about 20 million barrels daily. If the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge oil reserves were used to supply 5% of the U.S. daily consumption -- most is imported from Canada (19%), Mexico (15%), Saudi Arabia (11.5%), Nigeria (10.5%) and Venezuela (10.5%)[11] -- the reserves, using the low figure of 4.3 billion barrels, would last approximately 4300 days, or almost 12 years. Using the high estimate, the reserves would last approximately 11800 days, or 32 years. If the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was used to meet 100% of U.S. demand, it would last for 215 days under the low estimate, and 525 days or just 1.4 years if it contained 10.4 billion barrels.

Arctic Refuge drilling controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[RadioPatrol]

It doesn't have to be that way. We are sitting on so much oil and the environmentalists and liberals won let us drill. We could become completely oil independent. The US purchases 60% of the oil exported from Venezuela. We could single-handedly cripple the Venezuelan economy and this military threat would be over quickly. Their oil is 80% of their economy. It's an outrage to point our critical finger at Chavez while keeping them number 3 on our list of largest oil importers.

He'd sell more to the Chinese ........... but a good thought

 

[RadioPatrol]

This is not true. South and Central America have ALWAYS had socialist guerilla movements. The reason is despite having abundant natural resources over half the population of almost every country lives in total poverty. I am not talking "American poverty" where you are considered poor if you do not have 2 cars and a TV over 27 inches, I mean eating dirt poor. The elites and corrupt governments down there do in fact keep them in squalor.

USA Today showed a chart of Ecuador, Columbia and Venezuela, total populations and percentage of the pop living in poverty and it was astounding. The deal is that the socialist countries leaders promise a bunch but STILL keep the poor beat down.

Look at Mexico, they have oil, produce, agriculture, tequila, tourism and a grunch of manufacturing jobs since NAFTA yet a third of their population still eats bugs and lizards to survive. Why is it that Mexico is not a warmer version of the USA? Corruption, that is why.

It will continue to be the same way it has been for a century. Thugs under slightly different banners vying to be in charge on the backs of their populations. If Chavez was the socialist hero he claims to be 45% of the population surely wouldn't be living in poverty.

I was pointing out the fact Yugo would not be there to fund FARC for a while ....

but your right, the all campaign on "Change" then continue to #### over anyone not in their inner circle, once power is attained ........ that is why revolutions in Africa are fought over "Resources" Diamond Mines, Oil Refineries .... and the poor suffer continuously ....

 

[Lenny]

Originally Posted by Wikipedia
The U.S. consumes about 20 million barrels daily. If the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge oil reserves were used to supply 5% of the U.S. daily consumption -- most is imported from Canada (19%), Mexico (15%), Saudi Arabia (11.5%), Nigeria (10.5%) and Venezuela (10.5%)[11] -- the reserves, using the low figure of 4.3 billion barrels, would last approximately 4300 days, or almost 12 years. Using the high estimate, the reserves would last approximately 11800 days, or 32 years. If the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was used to meet 100% of U.S. demand, it would last for 215 days under the low estimate, and 525 days or just 1.4 years if it contained 10.4 billion barrels

and this is a bad thing?

 

[desertrat]

and this is a bad thing?

Ahmadinejad and Chavez cooked this up.

 

[High EGT]

This is not true. South and Central America have ALWAYS had socialist guerilla movements. The reason is despite having abundant natural resources over half the population of almost every country lives in total poverty. I am not talking "American poverty" where you are considered poor if you do not have 2 cars and a TV over 27 inches, I mean eating dirt poor. The elites and corrupt governments down there do in fact keep them in squalor.

USA Today showed a chart of Ecuador, Columbia and Venezuela, total populations and percentage of the pop living in poverty and it was astounding. The deal is that the socialist countries leaders promise a bunch but STILL keep the poor beat down.

Look at Mexico, they have oil, produce, agriculture, tequila, tourism and a grunch of manufacturing jobs since NAFTA yet a third of their population still eats bugs and lizards to survive. Why is it that Mexico is not a warmer version of the USA? Corruption, that is why.

It will continue to be the same way it has been for a century. Thugs under slightly different banners vying to be in charge on the backs of their populations. If Chavez was the socialist hero he claims to be 45% of the population surely wouldn't be living in poverty.

That’s what I've been saying all along!
I got a three day weekend coming up and think that’s all the time we'll need to defeat their Gov if say a dozen or more well armed SOMD dudes decide to head south and KA.

 

[edinsomd]

Hugo is saber-rattling to distract his populace from their worsening conditions in his socialist paradise. An old, but fairly effective, ploy.
Ed

 

[Ken King]

Hugo is saber-rattling to distract his populace from their worsening conditions in his socialist paradise. An old, but fairly effective, ploy.
Ed

And with Castro no longer there the spotlight is up for grabs.

 

[PsyOps]

He'd sell more to the Chinese ........... but a good thought

I failed to mention our oil boycott would have to be accompanied with embargos.

 

[PsyOps]

I know what you mean about us continuing to import oil from them while pointing fingers and I'm all for drilling and find our own sources of oil but I don't know that there's as much there as we would hope. People talk about ANWR as if it could supply us all of our needs forever but that's not the case. I know there are reports out there saying all sorts of different things about ANWR and that's the problem. No one knows.

Part of my point (which is a bit off topic here) is everyone (especially the left) is complaining about the cost of fuel when it doesn't have to cost half of what we pay if we become more reliant on our own. I find it hypocritical to scream about this problem while in the same breath deny access to our own resources because of environmental reasons, while condoning the destruction of the environments of other countries for our benefit. The domestic economic benefits of standing up our own oil reliance would be huge. But the liberals don't like that idea. It would mean more big corporations and more jobs and less dependence on them (government).