According to this story, Hugo Chavez believes the U.S. is preparing to invade Venezuala. Is this a legitimate claim? If so, how would the U.S. carry this invasion out with so many of its troops currently mired in the middle east?
While maintaining current commitments in Iraq (about 120,000 troops?) and Afghanistan (about 18,000 troops?) the U.S. cannot invade Venezuela. [sub](Barring delibrately stupid moves like forgetting that you need troops training to rotate into Iraq and Afghanistan and downtime for troops that have rotated out)[/sub]
Chavez is being a bit of a demogogue and a bit paranoid here, but he’s clever and deceitful enough to know that an external enemy takes a lot of the pressure off him from his internal political problems. The more hype about a potential U.S. invasion his population buys, the better off he is. Pretty hilarious that the plan involves “planes” and “aircraft carriers.” Well, duh! What war since WWII has the U.S. been involved in without planes and carriers. I think whoever wrote the article may be poking a wee bit of fun at Chavez here.
No. The US may have some sort of contingency plan to invade Venezuela, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there was some sort of contingency plan to invade Quebec in certain circumstances too. Chavez is obviously making the claim as a ploy to bolster his support at home. Unfortunately US actions re Iraq have tended to make his claim more credible in some circles.
It’s not really feasible. The US is not going to take on any other major commitments right now unless absolutely forced to. Another Grenada would be possible, but not Venezuela.
Fergawdsakes, people, SHHHHHHHHHH!
I just hope there’s term limits in Venezuela. At least with our Prez we know exactly to the minute when he’s taking Laura’s hand and walking down the Capitol steps.
Presidents in Venezuala can serve a maximum of two six-year terms.
Although I’m not sure if twelve years of Chavez would be much worse than eight years of Bush.
Chavez is, to use the technical term, a fucking nut.
He is convinced the CIA is behind everything bad that happens to him, from attempted coups to his Cheerios going stale. In reality, the CIA was only behind the Cheerios thing.
Chavez may well be a fucking nut, but his suspicion might be a bit understandable given the CIA’s “activities” in Central America in the 80’s.
Heh. And I guess Castro is a paranoid wierdo for being careful about his cigars. Read the United States plan against and this for more information.
In the past, we’ve shown absolutely no restraint in muddying our hands with Latin America’s business. Add to that Venezuela’s oil, our invasion of Iraq, Pat Robinson’s bizarre call for Chavez’s assassination, and the fact that we are already strongly suspected to be behind one anti-Chavez coup, and you’ve got a good reason to be paranoid.
Lots of ill-informed opinion here which seemingly reflects the Fox News propaganda machine.
But yes, the US wants to destroy the government in Venezuela and install one more to their liking. They already tried with the coup in 2002. The coup plotters had meetings with US officials and Washington approved the coup in violation of the OAS charter.
US officials and the large media have been engaging in a non-stop diplomatic and propaganda offensive against Chavez. Rumsfeld and Rice have made tours of Latin America trying to drum up support for their program to isolate Venezuela, but have gotten nowhere. They and other government officials make completely unsubstaniated charges regarding Venezuela interfering in the internal affairs of other states in the region, something everyone in the region knows to be completely false. On the other hand, everyone in Latin America is aware to the coups and invasions engineered by the US for a century or more. To people in the South, it is completely reasonable to expect the US to invade Venezuela. Only the US people are ignorant enough to believe the propaganda barrage which emanates from Washington and the mass media.
As a practical matter, however, the US will be unable to invade Venezuela unless it can resolve problems of a military and political nature. This seems unlikely.
Chavez has gained tremendous prestige in Latin America and the world because of his program and politics and the fact that he has presided over several clean elections and has a 70% approval rate.
What’s Bush’s again?
To learn more about events in Venezuela, and to avoid talking like an idiot on the subject, I suggest this site.
???
As opposed to the Al Jazeera, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC propaganda machines, I suppose.
I say we nuke 'em all. 
The US administration would LIKE to overthrow Chavez. Unfortunately for the administration, we have fairly limited resources. I have little doubt that we’re still funding, training, and arming the opposition so that they can attempt another coup.
In other words, they’re going to funnel the former war on drugs money to fund Chavez’s overthrow.
Chavez is right to be worried for his own safety. But he’s probably incorrect in his thinking that the US will launch a full-scale invasion of any sort, or even airstrikes. More likely, we’ll keep using local subcontractors to do the work.
Of course, if Chavez cuts off all oil supplies to the US and throws out all US oil companies … you may see an escalation of our tactics.
Chavez was in fact overthrown for a short period, and the US did in fact have something to do with it. Who’s delusional?
Chavez is so evil that he’s offered reduced cost gas to poorer Americans, hurricane relief and free eye surgery for Americans without healthcare. Someone please hold my hand - I’m a-scared!
Absolutely not, for the political and practical reasons listed by others.
Won’t/Isn’t happening. No way/No how. Having said that:
I am not sure what an “invasion” of Venezuela would entail
… Helping disgruntled Venezuelans overthrow Chavez? Would that take 100 of thousands of U.S. troops and a long term commitment? (Iraq) or would it take some Special Forces and 12,000 Troops to provide some stability (Afghanistan)?
If the later I don’t think troop levels enter into the military equation much.
There is a common misconception that the U.S. has every last available soldier in the Middle East. Not True. U.S. has an Army (not including National Guard and Reservists) of about 320,000 deployable troops at any one time.
Roughly 180,000 are now in Iraq, Kuwait and Afghanistan (this number includes reservists and National Guardsmen) and 25,000 are in Korea.
There are enough troops, if push came to shove, probably to “do” Venezuela. [N.B. Bush would probably be impeached. The all-volunteer army would crack. Even the neo-cons would desert him over the budget busting.] There are reasons this will not happen, But it isn’t (unless every Venezuelan is expected to grab a rifle to defend Chavez) really an issue of not having the troops to do it.
Don’t forget the 45,000 Army and National Guard troops now deployed in the Katrina recovery effort.
It would be a good dress rehearsal for overthrowing Mexico in a few years. You think it’s bad having that populist idiot Chavez in charge of far-away Venezuela? Wait until populist dickhead Lopez Obrador wins the presidency in Mexico in 2006 right on our very border.
The factual question has been answered about as well as it can be in this forum. Those wishing to debate the merits of American policy (past present and future) are invited to avail themselves of the Great Debates forum.
bibliophage
moderator GQ