Maduro Releases Video To Scare Off US Marines Should They Invade

[Polishprince]

Invading won't happen, but the OAS (of which we are a member of) will probably have to go in there to restore order once Maduro's government collapses.

Would you rather the Chinese or Russians swoop in and restore a government more to their liking?

I'd rather the people of Venezuela deal with their own issues...how many fucking times do we have to keep making the same mistakes....We tried it in El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicarauga -- we are best served to stay out of it because we tend to fuck things up more...

And I also find it funny how Trumpers on one hand praise China and Russia's dictators taking control in Syria and other hotspots, so why not here?

This is all about oil and I am 1000% against sending troops to die over someone's corporate interests -- let them hire some mercenaries and have at it

Our hemisphere, our issues.

The difference is with Venezuela even with all the shit that has happened there is still the base infrastructure and people availible to make recovery easier than in some of the smaller, less established countries.

And again, it would be via the OAS, but we would have to do most of the lifting.

I would see the intervention as the US taking over a port area, allowing control of aid access, and letting the other OAS members provide people to distribute the aid and to get the Venezuelans themselves back on their feet tho handle further distribution.

The biggest thing we could do is provide expertise and protection when getting their electrical grid back online.

Again, if we don't do it, we got Russia and China with bases in our "pond"

You keep brining up the OAS ...but something tells me you are the type who rails against NATO or the UN -- but now you are trying to backdoor your support for military intervention by claiming "we have to because of the OAS" -- spare me

The UN has a long history of hatred for America. I remember when the Intelligence Community was telling the world of Iraq's WMD ambitions. They snubbed their nose at the USA. Fortunately, the Coalition of the Willing came forward and put an end to it, ordering an intervention

"WMD ambitions?" Seriously? Beyond a few barrels of mustard gas we sold to Iraq, we had no evidence they had any Nuclear weapons that Bush claimed they had. There were no WMD's. The fact that we made the decision to go to Iraq based on bogus information, changed the lives of millions for the worse, and is still doing the same today.

The Intelligence Establishment gave Dubya a report on Iraq and WMD's. Libs criticize President Trump for disregarding Intelligence Reports and dissing the FBI and CIA. So which is it, are the CIA/FBI reliable or not?

 

[skookerasbil]

I'd rather the people of Venezuela deal with their own issues...how many fucking times do we have to keep making the same mistakes....We tried it in El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicarauga -- we are best served to stay out of it because we tend to fuck things up more...

And I also find it funny how Trumpers on one hand praise China and Russia's dictators taking control in Syria and other hotspots, so why not here?

This is all about oil and I am 1000% against sending troops to die over someone's corporate interests -- let them hire some mercenaries and have at it

Our hemisphere, our issues.

The difference is with Venezuela even with all the shit that has happened there is still the base infrastructure and people availible to make recovery easier than in some of the smaller, less established countries.

And again, it would be via the OAS, but we would have to do most of the lifting.

I would see the intervention as the US taking over a port area, allowing control of aid access, and letting the other OAS members provide people to distribute the aid and to get the Venezuelans themselves back on their feet tho handle further distribution.

The biggest thing we could do is provide expertise and protection when getting their electrical grid back online.

Again, if we don't do it, we got Russia and China with bases in our "pond"

You keep brining up the OAS ...but something tells me you are the type who rails against NATO or the UN -- but now you are trying to backdoor your support for military intervention by claiming "we have to because of the OAS" -- spare me

The UN has a long history of hatred for America. I remember when the Intelligence Community was telling the world of Iraq's WMD ambitions. They snubbed their nose at the USA. Fortunately, the Coalition of the Willing came forward and put an end to it, ordering an intervention

"WMD ambitions?" Seriously? Beyond a few barrels of mustard gas we sold to Iraq, we had no evidence they had any Nuclear weapons that Bush claimed they had. There were no WMD's. The fact that we made the decision to go to Iraq based on bogus information, changed the lives of millions for the worse, and is still doing the same today.

The Intelligence Establishment gave Dubya a report on Iraq and WMD's. Libs criticize President Trump for disregarding Intelligence Reports and dissing the FBI and CIA. So which is it, are the CIA/FBI reliable or not?

Lol.....oooops....wont get a coherent response from a progressive on that one?

Whatever the politics are at the time, that is the position the modern progressive takes....there is no absolute truth amongst these types.

Ghey

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

Our Jar Heads are already dying. From laughter.

A must see video.

Venezuelan Army Attempts to Scare US Marines with Video

 

[Andylusion]

Our Jar Heads are already dying. From laughter.

A must see video.

Venezuelan Army Attempts to Scare US Marines with Video

That is too funny. LMAO. That’s just going to piss them off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Our Jar Heads are already dying. From laughter.

A must see video.

Venezuelan Army Attempts to Scare US Marines with Video

Why would we go there again? Oh that's right, they have oil, diamonds, and gold. Got it.

We don't seem to be having any trouble with gold or diamonds, or oil.

We have no reason to go there at all. That is why the video is so funny. Not only is their starving to death, military that can barely afford bullets, not all that scary, but it is hilarious that the dumb as crap left-wingers think we have a reason to go there.

All the left-wing is stupid. Their left-wing is stupid for thinking we would ever go there and push over their starving soldiers, and our left-wing is stupid for defending this guy and thinking we would bother to go there.

Left-wing ideology is a mental illness.

Our history of intervention proves exactly the opposite; CIA in South America | Geopolitical Monitor

Yeah, I'm not one for this "Let's bring up what happens 60 years ago, in order to justify stupid opinions not supported by anything today."

To me, this is just witch hunting. You can't point to anything today that is a problem, so you have to go on an excavation mission into the past, to find something to dig up and say "we're causing venezuela to crash". No, that's excuse making.

Venezuela is starving, because they moved to the left. Venezuela is blacked out, because they moved to the left on energy. Venezuela has over 2 million people living outside the country, because they moved to the left.

Socialism always fails, and they have absolutely no one to blame but themselves.

 

[blastoff]

Careful what these fuckers wish for. If they’re seriously itching for a fight we got no option but to deploy a battalion or so of our Girl Scout’s Boys Troops to kick some serious brown ass down there!

 

[skookerasbil]

Our Jar Heads are already dying. From laughter.

A must see video.

Venezuelan Army Attempts to Scare US Marines with Video

View attachment 251057

Yep.....what an awesome country America would be if it embraced the world envisioned by people like Bernie Sanders and AOC! Free tatoo's!!

 

[Claudette]

Since US troops won't be invading its a moot point.

Funny though.

We've been invading them through sanctions and starvation. It's the same thing as having troops there.

OMG I'll be standing over her LMAO.

You are an idiot.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

This is all about oil and I am 1000% against sending troops to die over someone's corporate interests -- let them hire some mercenaries and have at it

So you admire wealthy people in history like Crassus, who organized their own armies? Suppose Bezos or Buffett hired and trained an Army to take over Venezuela at their own expenses for the resources? Would you be happy about that? Liberals like those two would impose a leftist ideology I'm sure, if they were successful?

If Bezos or any other liberal wanted to use the US military to invade Venezuela for corporate interests, I would oppose them too....and so would you, since they are "libs" --- but when your conservative masters tell you to support it for the same corporate interests, you are all for it...

I am consistent, you have no idea what being consistent means

 

[Weatherman2020]

Since US troops won't be invading its a moot point.

Funny though.

We've been invading them through sanctions and starvation. It's the same thing as having troops there.

There’s 190 other nations they can trade with. So what you’re saying is America is so great we can single handily destroy any nation on earth by simply ignoring them.

I agree.

 

[Polishprince]

This is all about oil and I am 1000% against sending troops to die over someone's corporate interests -- let them hire some mercenaries and have at it

So you admire wealthy people in history like Crassus, who organized their own armies? Suppose Bezos or Buffett hired and trained an Army to take over Venezuela at their own expenses for the resources? Would you be happy about that? Liberals like those two would impose a leftist ideology I'm sure, if they were successful?

If Bezos or any other liberal wanted to use the US military to invade Venezuela for corporate interests, I would oppose them too....and so would you, since they are "libs" --- but when your conservative masters tell you to support it for the same corporate interests, you are all for it...

I am consistent, you have no idea what being consistent means

How about if Bezos raised his own army to take Venezuela, like Crassus did to take out Spartacus?

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

Still waiting for someone to tell me why the fuck should we invade Venezuela?

I don't want to hear a trumper ever again talk about how they are against "Neo-Cons" -- Venezuela poses ZERO threat to the US....you conservatives never learn a lesson...

Invading won't happen, but the OAS (of which we are a member of) will probably have to go in there to restore order once Maduro's government collapses.

Would you rather the Chinese or Russians swoop in and restore a government more to their liking?

I'd rather the people of Venezuela deal with their own issues...how many fucking times do we have to keep making the same mistakes....We tried it in El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicarauga -- we are best served to stay out of it because we tend to fuck things up more...

And I also find it funny how Trumpers on one hand praise China and Russia's dictators taking control in Syria and other hotspots, so why not here?

This is all about oil and I am 1000% against sending troops to die over someone's corporate interests -- let them hire some mercenaries and have at it

Our hemisphere, our issues.

The difference is with Venezuela even with all the shit that has happened there is still the base infrastructure and people availible to make recovery easier than in some of the smaller, less established countries.

And again, it would be via the OAS, but we would have to do most of the lifting.

I would see the intervention as the US taking over a port area, allowing control of aid access, and letting the other OAS members provide people to distribute the aid and to get the Venezuelans themselves back on their feet tho handle further distribution.

The biggest thing we could do is provide expertise and protection when getting their electrical grid back online.

Again, if we don't do it, we got Russia and China with bases in our "pond"

You keep brining up the OAS ...but something tells me you are the type who rails against NATO or the UN -- but now you are trying to backdoor your support for military intervention by claiming "we have to because of the OAS" -- spare me

The UN has a long history of hatred for America. I remember when the Intelligence Community was telling the world of Iraq's WMD ambitions. They snubbed their nose at the USA. Fortunately, the Coalition of the Willing came forward and put an end to it, ordering an intervention

Lol @ UN has a history of hatred towards the US

This is why I have so little respect for Trumpers -- your arguments fold so easily....

Your claim is that you support the OAS and not the UN; because the UN hates the US....

Yet, I am willing to guarantee you that you accuse the majority of these OAS countries of being an infestation into your country, OAS countries like Mexico, Honduras, Haiti, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Panama, etc.....

But you are probably the same ones begging and whining about how they are not enough Europeans coming here...you know, those UN countries that are against America and stuff...

Just admit you will support any invasion into any country as long as you think that country is populated by brown people....

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

Still waiting for someone to tell me why the fuck should we invade Venezuela?

I don't want to hear a trumper ever again talk about how they are against "Neo-Cons" -- Venezuela poses ZERO threat to the US....you conservatives never learn a lesson...

Invading won't happen, but the OAS (of which we are a member of) will probably have to go in there to restore order once Maduro's government collapses.

Would you rather the Chinese or Russians swoop in and restore a government more to their liking?

I'd rather the people of Venezuela deal with their own issues...how many fucking times do we have to keep making the same mistakes....We tried it in El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicarauga -- we are best served to stay out of it because we tend to fuck things up more...

And I also find it funny how Trumpers on one hand praise China and Russia's dictators taking control in Syria and other hotspots, so why not here?

This is all about oil and I am 1000% against sending troops to die over someone's corporate interests -- let them hire some mercenaries and have at it

Our hemisphere, our issues.

The difference is with Venezuela even with all the shit that has happened there is still the base infrastructure and people availible to make recovery easier than in some of the smaller, less established countries.

And again, it would be via the OAS, but we would have to do most of the lifting.

I would see the intervention as the US taking over a port area, allowing control of aid access, and letting the other OAS members provide people to distribute the aid and to get the Venezuelans themselves back on their feet tho handle further distribution.

The biggest thing we could do is provide expertise and protection when getting their electrical grid back online.

Again, if we don't do it, we got Russia and China with bases in our "pond"

You keep brining up the OAS ...but something tells me you are the type who rails against NATO or the UN -- but now you are trying to backdoor your support for military intervention by claiming "we have to because of the OAS" -- spare me

Sorry, I'm not a head in the sand isolationist.

Spare me the strawman arguments.....

You are one who will always support invading a country as long as that country is mostly populated by people of color....period...and only if the invasion is for corporate access to resources, period....

 

[martybegan]

Invading won't happen, but the OAS (of which we are a member of) will probably have to go in there to restore order once Maduro's government collapses.

Would you rather the Chinese or Russians swoop in and restore a government more to their liking?

I'd rather the people of Venezuela deal with their own issues...how many fucking times do we have to keep making the same mistakes....We tried it in El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicarauga -- we are best served to stay out of it because we tend to fuck things up more...

And I also find it funny how Trumpers on one hand praise China and Russia's dictators taking control in Syria and other hotspots, so why not here?

This is all about oil and I am 1000% against sending troops to die over someone's corporate interests -- let them hire some mercenaries and have at it

Our hemisphere, our issues.

The difference is with Venezuela even with all the shit that has happened there is still the base infrastructure and people availible to make recovery easier than in some of the smaller, less established countries.

And again, it would be via the OAS, but we would have to do most of the lifting.

I would see the intervention as the US taking over a port area, allowing control of aid access, and letting the other OAS members provide people to distribute the aid and to get the Venezuelans themselves back on their feet tho handle further distribution.

The biggest thing we could do is provide expertise and protection when getting their electrical grid back online.

Again, if we don't do it, we got Russia and China with bases in our "pond"

You keep brining up the OAS ...but something tells me you are the type who rails against NATO or the UN -- but now you are trying to backdoor your support for military intervention by claiming "we have to because of the OAS" -- spare me

Sorry, I'm not a head in the sand isolationist.

Spare me the strawman arguments.....

You are one who will always support invading a country as long as that country is mostly populated by people of color....period...and only if the invasion is for corporate access to resources, period....

And just how do you come to that assumption?

I believe the term is "assuming facts not in evidence"

 

[skookerasbil]

Invading won't happen, but the OAS (of which we are a member of) will probably have to go in there to restore order once Maduro's government collapses.

Would you rather the Chinese or Russians swoop in and restore a government more to their liking?

I'd rather the people of Venezuela deal with their own issues...how many fucking times do we have to keep making the same mistakes....We tried it in El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicarauga -- we are best served to stay out of it because we tend to fuck things up more...

And I also find it funny how Trumpers on one hand praise China and Russia's dictators taking control in Syria and other hotspots, so why not here?

This is all about oil and I am 1000% against sending troops to die over someone's corporate interests -- let them hire some mercenaries and have at it

Our hemisphere, our issues.

The difference is with Venezuela even with all the shit that has happened there is still the base infrastructure and people availible to make recovery easier than in some of the smaller, less established countries.

And again, it would be via the OAS, but we would have to do most of the lifting.

I would see the intervention as the US taking over a port area, allowing control of aid access, and letting the other OAS members provide people to distribute the aid and to get the Venezuelans themselves back on their feet tho handle further distribution.

The biggest thing we could do is provide expertise and protection when getting their electrical grid back online.

Again, if we don't do it, we got Russia and China with bases in our "pond"

You keep brining up the OAS ...but something tells me you are the type who rails against NATO or the UN -- but now you are trying to backdoor your support for military intervention by claiming "we have to because of the OAS" -- spare me

Sorry, I'm not a head in the sand isolationist.

Spare me the strawman arguments.....

You are one who will always support invading a country as long as that country is mostly populated by people of color....period...and only if the invasion is for corporate access to resources, period....

Oh Gawd.....another America hater who has it all figured out!

 

[Weatherman2020]

Invading won't happen, but the OAS (of which we are a member of) will probably have to go in there to restore order once Maduro's government collapses.

Would you rather the Chinese or Russians swoop in and restore a government more to their liking?

I'd rather the people of Venezuela deal with their own issues...how many fucking times do we have to keep making the same mistakes....We tried it in El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicarauga -- we are best served to stay out of it because we tend to fuck things up more...

And I also find it funny how Trumpers on one hand praise China and Russia's dictators taking control in Syria and other hotspots, so why not here?

This is all about oil and I am 1000% against sending troops to die over someone's corporate interests -- let them hire some mercenaries and have at it

Our hemisphere, our issues.

The difference is with Venezuela even with all the shit that has happened there is still the base infrastructure and people availible to make recovery easier than in some of the smaller, less established countries.

And again, it would be via the OAS, but we would have to do most of the lifting.

I would see the intervention as the US taking over a port area, allowing control of aid access, and letting the other OAS members provide people to distribute the aid and to get the Venezuelans themselves back on their feet tho handle further distribution.

The biggest thing we could do is provide expertise and protection when getting their electrical grid back online.

Again, if we don't do it, we got Russia and China with bases in our "pond"

You keep brining up the OAS ...but something tells me you are the type who rails against NATO or the UN -- but now you are trying to backdoor your support for military intervention by claiming "we have to because of the OAS" -- spare me

The UN has a long history of hatred for America. I remember when the Intelligence Community was telling the world of Iraq's WMD ambitions. They snubbed their nose at the USA. Fortunately, the Coalition of the Willing came forward and put an end to it, ordering an intervention

"WMD ambitions?" Seriously? Beyond a few barrels of mustard gas we sold to Iraq, we had no evidence they had any Nuclear weapons that Bush claimed they had. There were no WMD's. The fact that we made the decision to go to Iraq based on bogus information, changed the lives of millions for the worse, and is still doing the same today.

Hillary said War was necessary and Bill said Iraq had WMDs when Bush was President.

So stick your pathetic whining where the sun don’t shine.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

I'd rather the people of Venezuela deal with their own issues...how many fucking times do we have to keep making the same mistakes....We tried it in El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicarauga -- we are best served to stay out of it because we tend to fuck things up more...

And I also find it funny how Trumpers on one hand praise China and Russia's dictators taking control in Syria and other hotspots, so why not here?

This is all about oil and I am 1000% against sending troops to die over someone's corporate interests -- let them hire some mercenaries and have at it

Our hemisphere, our issues.

The difference is with Venezuela even with all the shit that has happened there is still the base infrastructure and people availible to make recovery easier than in some of the smaller, less established countries.

And again, it would be via the OAS, but we would have to do most of the lifting.

I would see the intervention as the US taking over a port area, allowing control of aid access, and letting the other OAS members provide people to distribute the aid and to get the Venezuelans themselves back on their feet tho handle further distribution.

The biggest thing we could do is provide expertise and protection when getting their electrical grid back online.

Again, if we don't do it, we got Russia and China with bases in our "pond"

You keep brining up the OAS ...but something tells me you are the type who rails against NATO or the UN -- but now you are trying to backdoor your support for military intervention by claiming "we have to because of the OAS" -- spare me

Sorry, I'm not a head in the sand isolationist.

Spare me the strawman arguments.....

You are one who will always support invading a country as long as that country is mostly populated by people of color....period...and only if the invasion is for corporate access to resources, period....

And just how do you come to that assumption?

I believe the term is "assuming facts not in evidence"

No need to make assumptions when I have 75 years of established history....of which, history has shown that the main countries we invade are countries where the majority population is made up of people of color.....and its usually neo-cons banging the drums every step of the way.....

Since we failed at trying to do this to Cuba, why do you feel we need to do this to Venezuela? Hell, at least Cuba was close to having nukes....and if you are claiming this is a humanitarian crisis, that is bullshit too.....conservatives could give a fuck about non-white humanity unless they are Saudis

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

I'd rather the people of Venezuela deal with their own issues...how many fucking times do we have to keep making the same mistakes....We tried it in El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicarauga -- we are best served to stay out of it because we tend to fuck things up more...

And I also find it funny how Trumpers on one hand praise China and Russia's dictators taking control in Syria and other hotspots, so why not here?

This is all about oil and I am 1000% against sending troops to die over someone's corporate interests -- let them hire some mercenaries and have at it

Our hemisphere, our issues.

The difference is with Venezuela even with all the shit that has happened there is still the base infrastructure and people availible to make recovery easier than in some of the smaller, less established countries.

And again, it would be via the OAS, but we would have to do most of the lifting.

I would see the intervention as the US taking over a port area, allowing control of aid access, and letting the other OAS members provide people to distribute the aid and to get the Venezuelans themselves back on their feet tho handle further distribution.

The biggest thing we could do is provide expertise and protection when getting their electrical grid back online.

Again, if we don't do it, we got Russia and China with bases in our "pond"

You keep brining up the OAS ...but something tells me you are the type who rails against NATO or the UN -- but now you are trying to backdoor your support for military intervention by claiming "we have to because of the OAS" -- spare me

Sorry, I'm not a head in the sand isolationist.

Spare me the strawman arguments.....

You are one who will always support invading a country as long as that country is mostly populated by people of color....period...and only if the invasion is for corporate access to resources, period....

Oh Gawd.....another America hater who has it all figured out!

And let me know why you wasn't banging the drum to invade Cuba for the past 30 or so years......but suddenly you are gung ho to invade Venezuela? gtfoh

 

[Weatherman2020]

Our hemisphere, our issues.

The difference is with Venezuela even with all the shit that has happened there is still the base infrastructure and people availible to make recovery easier than in some of the smaller, less established countries.

And again, it would be via the OAS, but we would have to do most of the lifting.

I would see the intervention as the US taking over a port area, allowing control of aid access, and letting the other OAS members provide people to distribute the aid and to get the Venezuelans themselves back on their feet tho handle further distribution.

The biggest thing we could do is provide expertise and protection when getting their electrical grid back online.

Again, if we don't do it, we got Russia and China with bases in our "pond"

You keep brining up the OAS ...but something tells me you are the type who rails against NATO or the UN -- but now you are trying to backdoor your support for military intervention by claiming "we have to because of the OAS" -- spare me

Sorry, I'm not a head in the sand isolationist.

Spare me the strawman arguments.....

You are one who will always support invading a country as long as that country is mostly populated by people of color....period...and only if the invasion is for corporate access to resources, period....

And just how do you come to that assumption?

I believe the term is "assuming facts not in evidence"

No need to make assumptions when I have 75 years of established history....of which, history has shown that the main countries we invade are countries where the majority population is made up of people of color.....and its usually neo-cons banging the drums every step of the way.....

Since we failed at trying to do this to Cuba, why do you feel we need to do this to Venezuela? Hell, at least Cuba was close to having nukes....and if you are claiming this is a humanitarian crisis, that is bullshit too.....conservatives could give a fuck about non-white humanity unless they are Saudis

You left out we kill kittens too. Don’t forget the kittens.

 

[martybegan]

Our hemisphere, our issues.

The difference is with Venezuela even with all the shit that has happened there is still the base infrastructure and people availible to make recovery easier than in some of the smaller, less established countries.

And again, it would be via the OAS, but we would have to do most of the lifting.

I would see the intervention as the US taking over a port area, allowing control of aid access, and letting the other OAS members provide people to distribute the aid and to get the Venezuelans themselves back on their feet tho handle further distribution.

The biggest thing we could do is provide expertise and protection when getting their electrical grid back online.

Again, if we don't do it, we got Russia and China with bases in our "pond"

You keep brining up the OAS ...but something tells me you are the type who rails against NATO or the UN -- but now you are trying to backdoor your support for military intervention by claiming "we have to because of the OAS" -- spare me

Sorry, I'm not a head in the sand isolationist.

Spare me the strawman arguments.....

You are one who will always support invading a country as long as that country is mostly populated by people of color....period...and only if the invasion is for corporate access to resources, period....

And just how do you come to that assumption?

I believe the term is "assuming facts not in evidence"

No need to make assumptions when I have 75 years of established history....of which, history has shown that the main countries we invade are countries where the majority population is made up of people of color.....and its usually neo-cons banging the drums every step of the way.....

Since we failed at trying to do this to Cuba, why do you feel we need to do this to Venezuela? Hell, at least Cuba was close to having nukes....and if you are claiming this is a humanitarian crisis, that is bullshit too.....conservatives could give a fuck about non-white humanity unless they are Saudis

correlation does not equal causation.

And your assumption of blanket racism is false, and just as dumb as when progressives do it.

 

[BWK]

I'd rather the people of Venezuela deal with their own issues...how many fucking times do we have to keep making the same mistakes....We tried it in El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicarauga -- we are best served to stay out of it because we tend to fuck things up more...

And I also find it funny how Trumpers on one hand praise China and Russia's dictators taking control in Syria and other hotspots, so why not here?

This is all about oil and I am 1000% against sending troops to die over someone's corporate interests -- let them hire some mercenaries and have at it

Our hemisphere, our issues.

The difference is with Venezuela even with all the shit that has happened there is still the base infrastructure and people availible to make recovery easier than in some of the smaller, less established countries.

And again, it would be via the OAS, but we would have to do most of the lifting.

I would see the intervention as the US taking over a port area, allowing control of aid access, and letting the other OAS members provide people to distribute the aid and to get the Venezuelans themselves back on their feet tho handle further distribution.

The biggest thing we could do is provide expertise and protection when getting their electrical grid back online.

Again, if we don't do it, we got Russia and China with bases in our "pond"

You keep brining up the OAS ...but something tells me you are the type who rails against NATO or the UN -- but now you are trying to backdoor your support for military intervention by claiming "we have to because of the OAS" -- spare me

The UN has a long history of hatred for America. I remember when the Intelligence Community was telling the world of Iraq's WMD ambitions. They snubbed their nose at the USA. Fortunately, the Coalition of the Willing came forward and put an end to it, ordering an intervention

"WMD ambitions?" Seriously? Beyond a few barrels of mustard gas we sold to Iraq, we had no evidence they had any Nuclear weapons that Bush claimed they had. There were no WMD's. The fact that we made the decision to go to Iraq based on bogus information, changed the lives of millions for the worse, and is still doing the same today.

Hillary said War was necessary and Bill said Iraq had WMDs when Bush was President.

So stick your pathetic whining where the sun don’t shine.

Lol! You took Bill Clinton's word for it? Lol! Now that's a good one. What Bill Clinton said was that he thought Saddam was actively seeking WMD's. The only thing Saddam had were a few barrels of Mustard gas we sold him.

Beyond that, you presented nothing in the way of a counter argument.