Hugo Chavez is Dead

But stopping shipments to the US would not fundamentally alter anything. Oil is traded on a worldwide basis in very liquid markets meaning plenty of buyers and plenty of sellers. Venezuela would not stop selling oil therefore there would be no change to total worldwide supply and demand. The US would simply source additional supply from elsewhere. The net effect would be minimal on both parties...pennies on the barrel.

The US gov't knows this. Chavez knew this too. His statements had nothing to do with economics and were not even directed at the US. His statements and threats are/were designed for domestic political reasons so he could show his base that he would stand up to the US. No one in the industry took his threats seriously and no one cared anyway because everyone knows that it would have no meaningful impact.

Hence the idea that these statements lead to some US conspiracy is absurd.

SUD123456

Also, I just want to make it clear that I don't think he was assassinated.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

That's way to iffy to make any kind of logical sense.

Aljosa23

So maybe they poisoned him with something that maybe could increase his chances of getting cancer, but maybe doesn't, on the chance that maybe they might feel the need to remove him some day. Think about that for a moment. Does that really make a lick of sense? Would it not be more rational, not to mention effective, to utilize some sure-fire means of killing him when/if such need arises?

lai is still upset at us. Says he wants to write a book about Obama. I am saddened that he has devolved to this leveldave123321

His party still believes he was "infected with cancer".  Apparently, biology is not taught in Venezuela.

sonicare

Yeah, it's like impossible to purposely radiate someone or somewhere, right?! :lol:

I'm not even a conspiracy theorist, and don't care to argue whether he was killed or not, but you really need to check your facts before you insult someone.

In any case, he was the elected president of Venezuela, with the people's support, and I hope his sucessor has nearly as much backing from the people, and is nearly as able in administrating Venezuela as Chavez was.

I did not agree with many of his policies, but he did do some good things for his country. RIP. 

So maybe they poisoned him with something that maybe could increase his chances of getting cancer, but maybe doesn't, on the chance that maybe they might feel the need to remove him some day. Think about that for a moment. Does that really make a lick of sense? Would it not be more rational, not to mention effective, to utilize some sure-fire means of killing him when/if such need arises?

worlock77

:( sad... He was a great leader for Latin America. History will give him a proper place as one of the leaders who gave back some dignity to the Venezuelans and promoted the much needed Latin American union which, thanks to it, it was one of the only regions to actually grow admit the crisis reducing poverty and unemployment considerably. R.I.P Chavez. I hope our future depars more great leaders liker you.

Glad he's dead. He did quite some harm for the people of Venezuela, but I kind of hope the socialism stays.

I get why some of Latin America is socialist, they just need less incredibly corrupt leaders.

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

I bet your dislike of him basically amounts to "because Bush did."

airshocker

Not really. He was a velvet dictator and a human rights violator, not to mention a corrupt piece of sh*t.

You can try and call him a "socialist" but I have more respect for -Sun_tzu-'s political ideals(which is admittedly very little to begin with) than I ever will for Chavez.

Really, who isn't nowadays?

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

So maybe they poisoned him with something that maybe could increase his chances of getting cancer, but maybe doesn't, on the chance that maybe they might feel the need to remove him some day. Think about that for a moment. Does that really make a lick of sense? Would it not be more rational, not to mention effective, to utilize some sure-fire means of killing him when/if such need arises?

Aljosa23

I don't put it past the US to do something underhanded like have a rival would leader killed, but this particular idea just isn't logical. It's way too impractical and uncertain for the US to bother with when there are a thousand other methods they could have employed that would have been certain to kill him.

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

So maybe they poisoned him with something that maybe could increase his chances of getting cancer, but maybe doesn't, on the chance that maybe they might feel the need to remove him some day. Think about that for a moment. Does that really make a lick of sense? Would it not be more rational, not to mention effective, to utilize some sure-fire means of killing him when/if such need arises?

worlock77

I don't put it past the US to do something underhanded like have a rival would leader killed, but this particular idea just isn't logical. It's way too impractical and uncertain for the US to bother with when there are a thousand other methods they could have employed that would have been certain to kill him.

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

So maybe they poisoned him with something that maybe could increase his chances of getting cancer, but maybe doesn't, on the chance that maybe they might feel the need to remove him some day. Think about that for a moment. Does that really make a lick of sense? Would it not be more rational, not to mention effective, to utilize some sure-fire means of killing him when/if such need arises?

worlock77

I don't put it past the US to do something underhanded like have a rival would leader killed, but this particular idea just isn't logical. It's way too impractical and uncertain for the US to bother with when there are a thousand other methods they could have employed that would have been certain to kill him.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]Well one could certainly argue that he did enough antagonizing the US during Bush and it's not impossible that someone back then got him somehow.

kuraimen

I don't put it past the US to do something underhanded like have a rival would leader killed, but this particular idea just isn't logical. It's way too impractical and uncertain for the US to bother with when there are a thousand other methods they could have employed that would have been certain to kill him.

[QUOTE="sherman-tank1"]

[QUOTE="osirisx3"]

Socialism needs a new strong leader. RIP comrade Chavez he really helped the poor of his nation.

Riverwolf007

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="worlock77"]

I don't put it past the US to do something underhanded like have a rival would leader killed, but this particular idea just isn't logical. It's way too impractical and uncertain for the US to bother with when there are a thousand other methods they could have employed that would have been certain to kill him.

sonicare

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

[QUOTE="sherman-tank1"]Ugh, Socialism.

sherman-tank1

Venezuela would be in such a better place if that man had lost that 98 election. Now a city like Caracas ended 2012 with a murder rate of 200 per 100.000 habitants. Largest in the world. A gigantic social war is going on. To have an idea, only in Caracas there were more murders than the whole United States last year.  

Their murder rate was around 147/100.000 just the other day. Seriously, are they looking to see where does the rate stop? One day, their poor will notice hopefully ( after all, they are killing themselfs)  

Venezuela would be in such a better place if that man had lost that 98 election. Now a city like Caracas ended 2012 with a murder rate of 200 per 100.000 habitants. Largest in the world. A gigantic social war is going on. To have an idea, only in Caracas there were more murders than the whole United States last year.  

Their murder rate was around 147/100.000 just the other day. Seriously, are they looking to see where does the rate stop? One day, their poor will notice hopefully ( after all, they are killing themselfs)  

Adrianstalker

[QUOTE="Adrianstalker"]

Venezuela would be in such a better place if that man had lost that 98 election. Now a city like Caracas ended 2012 with a murder rate of 200 per 100.000 habitants. Largest in the world. A gigantic social war is going on. To have an idea, only in Caracas there were more murders than the whole United States last year.  

Their murder rate was around 147/100.000 just the other day. Seriously, are they looking to see where does the rate stop? One day, their poor will notice hopefully ( after all, they are killing themselfs)  

Bucked20

Yes it's insane. The nation murder rate ended 2012 at 73/100k. 2011 were 67. Enourmous either way

Surely there are peaceful small cities, but Caracas is hell on earth

Venezuela would be in such a better place if that man had lost that 98 election. Now a city like Caracas ended 2012 with a murder rate of 200 per 100.000 habitants. Largest in the world. A gigantic social war is going on. To have an idea, only in Caracas there were more murders than the whole United States last year.  

Their murder rate was around 147/100.000 just the other day. Seriously, are they looking to see where does the rate stop? One day, their poor will notice hopefully ( after all, they are killing themselfs)  

Adrianstalker

[QUOTE="Adrianstalker"]

Venezuela would be in such a better place if that man had lost that 98 election. Now a city like Caracas ended 2012 with a murder rate of 200 per 100.000 habitants. Largest in the world. A gigantic social war is going on. To have an idea, only in Caracas there were more murders than the whole United States last year.  

Their murder rate was around 147/100.000 just the other day. Seriously, are they looking to see where does the rate stop? One day, their poor will notice hopefully ( after all, they are killing themselves)  

kuraimen

I would say that most of these "good stats" would be at a higher level without Chavez. Practically all Latin Americas had their social diferences improved, given that the last decades was one of the most prosperous in terms of economy in the region. Brazil has rised 30 millions into middle class, Chile is reaching first world HDI status, Peru is experiencieng steady and balanced economy growth, among other examples. None of those came with the price of an african war zone murder rate. 

Good. He was a nut.

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="Adrianstalker"]

Venezuela would be in such a better place if that man had lost that 98 election. Now a city like Caracas ended 2012 with a murder rate of 200 per 100.000 habitants. Largest in the world. A gigantic social war is going on. To have an idea, only in Caracas there were more murders than the whole United States last year.  

Their murder rate was around 147/100.000 just the other day. Seriously, are they looking to see where does the rate stop? One day, their poor will notice hopefully ( after all, they are killing themselves)  

Adrianstalker

I would say that most of these "good stats" would be at a higher level without Chavez. Practically all Latin Americas had their social diferences improved, given that the last decades was one of the most prosperous in terms of economy in the region. Brazil has rised 30 millions into middle class, Chile is reaching first world HDI status, Peru is experiencieng steady and balanced economy growth, among other examples. None of those came with the price of an african war zone murder rate. 

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

[QUOTE="sherman-tank1"]Ugh, Socialism.

sherman-tank1

dave123321

:( sad... He was a great leader for Latin America. History will give him a proper place as one of the leaders who gave back some dignity to the Venezuelans and promoted the much needed Latin American union which, thanks to it, it was one of the only regions to actually grow admit the crisis reducing poverty and unemployment considerably. R.I.P Chavez. I hope our future depars more great leaders liker you.

kuraimen

edit: also channels and radio stations being shut down for not airing his speeches added to venezuelans' dignity, eh? i heard venezuelans are really proud of it.

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]

:( sad... He was a great leader for Latin America. History will give him a proper place as one of the leaders who gave back some dignity to the Venezuelans and promoted the much needed Latin American union which, thanks to it, it was one of the only regions to actually grow admit the crisis reducing poverty and unemployment considerably. R.I.P Chavez. I hope our future depars more great leaders liker you.

VaguelyTagged

edit: also channels and radio stations being shut down for not airing his speeches added to venezuelans' dignity, eh? i heard venezuelans are really proud of it.

[QUOTE="VaguelyTagged"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]

:( sad... He was a great leader for Latin America. History will give him a proper place as one of the leaders who gave back some dignity to the Venezuelans and promoted the much needed Latin American union which, thanks to it, it was one of the only regions to actually grow admit the crisis reducing poverty and unemployment considerably. R.I.P Chavez. I hope our future depars more great leaders liker you.

-Sun_Tzu-

edit: also channels and radio stations being shut down for not airing his speeches added to venezuelans' dignity, eh? i heard venezuelans are really proud of it.

RIP 

RIP

[QUOTE="Adrianstalker"]

Venezuela would be in such a better place if that man had lost that 98 election. Now a city like Caracas ended 2012 with a murder rate of 200 per 100.000 habitants. Largest in the world. A gigantic social war is going on. To have an idea, only in Caracas there were more murders than the whole United States last year.  

Their murder rate was around 147/100.000 just the other day. Seriously, are they looking to see where does the rate stop? One day, their poor will notice hopefully ( after all, they are killing themselfs)  

kuraimen

[QUOTE="Adrianstalker"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"] Before Chavez Venezuela got 1% of the income from oil. The other 99% was taken by foreign companies. Chavez managed to make 2 million people literate where before children were not allowed in school without papers. He brought doctors to poor communities that were forgotten. He reduced poverty from a staggering 60% which made Venezuela the poorest country in the region down to the 20%s. And you dare say Venezuela would be better. Sure crime increased but it wasn't low before either and no big change happens all at once. Chavez have dignity back to poor Venezuelans and fixed the country in large part. The work is not over but much more people are better now thanks to him and that's why they overwhelmingly supported him probably more than any other president in the american continent.-Sun_Tzu-

I would say that most of these "good stats" would be at a higher level without Chavez. Practically all Latin Americas had their social diferences improved, given that the last decades was one of the most prosperous in terms of economy in the region. Brazil has rised 30 millions into middle class, Chile is reaching first world HDI status, Peru is experiencieng steady and balanced economy growth, among other examples. None of those came with the price of an african war zone murder rate. 

Chavez did have direct influence on the elections of Evo Morales ( Bolivia) and Rafael Correa ( Ecuador). Albeit they have friendly relations with the current government of Brazil ( first elected in 2002) he didn't play a role at their election at all (Brazilian politics always goes solo on South America)

Chile and Peru, well, I don't think Chavez reach quite there too. Sure, there is always admires all along South America, but not enough to play the role as he did at Bolivia and Ecuador. Also, remind that these countries I first exampled, didn't change their constitution and went on a ideology streak that scared off exterior investments.

What I mean is that their economic improvement by nationalizing oil ( still highly fragile ) came with a price that no other Latin American country is paying. Yet, all Latin Americans countries have improved social standards on the same time period. Being left or not 

In short, Venezuela failed to diverse their economy when everyone else was doing it.  

Before Chavez Venezuela got 1% of the income from oil. The other 99% was taken by foreign companies. Chavez managed to make 2 million people literate where before children were not allowed in school without papers. He brought doctors to poor communities that were forgotten. He reduced poverty from a staggering 60% which made Venezuela the poorest country in the region down to the 20%s. And you dare say Venezuela would be better. Sure crime increased but it wasn't low before either and no big change happens all at once. Chavez have dignity back to poor Venezuelans and fixed the country in large part. The work is not over but much more people are better now thanks to him and that's why they overwhelmingly supported him probably more than any other president in the american continent.kuraimen

:lol:

Yeah, because fixing elections and nationalizing an oil company(by military force) makes him such a great guy!

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]Before Chavez Venezuela got 1% of the income from oil. The other 99% was taken by foreign companies. Chavez managed to make 2 million people literate where before children were not allowed in school without papers. He brought doctors to poor communities that were forgotten. He reduced poverty from a staggering 60% which made Venezuela the poorest country in the region down to the 20%s. And you dare say Venezuela would be better. Sure crime increased but it wasn't low before either and no big change happens all at once. Chavez have dignity back to poor Venezuelans and fixed the country in large part. The work is not over but much more people are better now thanks to him and that's why they overwhelmingly supported him probably more than any other president in the american continent.airshocker

:lol:

Yeah, because fixing elections and nationalizing an oil company(by military force) makes him such a great guy!

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]Before Chavez Venezuela got 1% of the income from oil. The other 99% was taken by foreign companies. Chavez managed to make 2 million people literate where before children were not allowed in school without papers. He brought doctors to poor communities that were forgotten. He reduced poverty from a staggering 60% which made Venezuela the poorest country in the region down to the 20%s. And you dare say Venezuela would be better. Sure crime increased but it wasn't low before either and no big change happens all at once. Chavez have dignity back to poor Venezuelans and fixed the country in large part. The work is not over but much more people are better now thanks to him and that's why they overwhelmingly supported him probably more than any other president in the american continent.airshocker

:lol:

Yeah, because fixing elections and nationalizing an oil company(by military force) makes him such a great guy!

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="Adrianstalker"]

Venezuela would be in such a better place if that man had lost that 98 election. Now a city like Caracas ended 2012 with a murder rate of 200 per 100.000 habitants. Largest in the world. A gigantic social war is going on. To have an idea, only in Caracas there were more murders than the whole United States last year.  

Their murder rate was around 147/100.000 just the other day. Seriously, are they looking to see where does the rate stop? One day, their poor will notice hopefully ( after all, they are killing themselves)  

Adrianstalker

I would say that most of these "good stats" would be at a higher level without Chavez. Practically all Latin Americas had their social diferences improved, given that the last decades was one of the most prosperous in terms of economy in the region. Brazil has rised 30 millions into middle class, Chile is reaching first world HDI status, Peru is experiencieng steady and balanced economy growth, among other examples. None of those came with the price of an african war zone murder rate. 

baruch sheptaranu

 

I will not miss him.

Darkman2007

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]Well one could certainly argue that he did enough antagonizing the US during Bush and it's not impossible that someone back then got him somehow.

kuraimen

I don't put it past the US to do something underhanded like have a rival would leader killed, but this particular idea just isn't logical. It's way too impractical and uncertain for the US to bother with when there are a thousand other methods they could have employed that would have been certain to kill him.

Except that poisoning somebody or blowing them up are generally highly effective methods at killing someone if you successfully pull it off. Maybe increasing their chance of possibly getting cancer someday (assuming it were possible) is not. I'm not arguing that the United States wouldn't try to murder a rival leader if it served their interests. I'm saying that the idea they somehow gave Chavez a greater chance of getting cancer is absurd on multiple levels.

Meh who cares. 

interesting guy.  Hated the US government, yet was a fan of its people.  More American than many, in some respects lol.