Who´d win, Chavez vs Bush?

Why does the US fear Hugo Chavez? 

>>1
We fear he will wipe out people's families and torture them to death for disagreeing with him. He has too much power. He is a tyrant.

because if socialism spreads down south we won't be able to viciously take advantage of their natural resources, duh!

>>3
Why is Chavez still selling oil to the US and spending the majority of profits on weapons?

>>3
Also why does Chavez need to rule by decree (like Tsar Nicholas II) if his actions are going to be what the people want?

>>5
He can rule by decree because the opposition chose to boycott the last election and the parliament is now filled with his supporters. And how can he be a tyrant when he has been elected over and over again in elections that has been observed by the UN   and whatnot. Compared to the murderous motherfucker in Colombia Chavez is a fucking lamb. 

He is just another big mouth cocksucker promising the mother of all battles.

He is just another big mouth cocksucker promising the mother of all battles.

His people love him. And he can pun really well too! He calls W el diablo! Thats shitiest shit ever!

>>4
On weapons?  Try on the poor.  Granted, his social programs are shameless self-promotion scams to keep himself in power, but he's not really building up that much military might.  He's just on a power trip because he wants himself and his family to stay in power indefinitely.

>>He calls Weeaboo!

Did somebody say wee-a-boo?

'Cause I'm pretty sure I heard somebody say wee-a-boo.

>>10
Well, as long as you believe that there is no need to send the coup squad or the marines? Because whatever you say hes still democratically elected and by couping or assassinating or invading  you loose all moral high ground you might once had.

>>10
He is spending an enormous sum on arms, triple the amount spent by the previous and supposedly evil capitalist regime. The proportion spent on the military is reaching soviet union standards.

Yeah, he is finally building small schools and hooking communities up to electricity, but a lot more would be done if Venezuela were a social-democracy instead of a social-tyranny.

>>13
The US has the highest arms expenditures (both absolute and per capita) in the world by far. They must evil!
Well, he IS buying weapons because his northern neighbor has declared the country a trouble country or whatever, and they have tried to coup him away. They have also talked about assassination. And they have invaded countries based for no rational reason. So, its like Israel or Qin-china building walls to hold of the barbarians!

>>14
How far did you get in maths at high school? The only reason the US spends so much per capita is because it has a higher GDP per capita. As a proportion of the GDP of the entire country Venezuela spends more. Also I'm from New Zealand so I don't give a shit. Yeah US is bad, so is Venezuela. The difference is you'd suck off your god Chavez if you had the chance and think the US jumped out of Satan's ass.

Since you have no argument to prove that Chavez is not a tyrant, I win the argument.

K?

>>15
Source plz since im to lazy to find those numbers by my self and if you have already done it then why bother. Because you did do the math and just didnt guess now did you?
And how do you prove somebody is NOT a tyrant? I mean, there are no death camps, there is freedom of speech, there is a political opposition, there is fair and free elections etc. Is heavy arms expenditures what makes somebody a tyrant? How large part of their GDP does New Zeeland spend on arms? Other tyrannic countries like Germany, UK, Australia, India etc? Could the math professor please make a nice chart?
And just in case if didnt get it, the burden of proof are on those who claim that Chavez is a tyrant, since it actually takes more than opinion to a tyrant make.

>>16
Google it lazy ass, he's ruling by decree now. If someone calling himself a libertarian wanted to rule by decree I wouldn't suck his dick, I'd be with you guys calling him a lying piece of shit because it's so obviously fucking hypocritical even if I somehow profitted from the tyrant's rulership I'd still oppose him because I could not emotionally handle the humiliation of acting like a complete idiot.

People who rule by decree are the evil ruling class you always talk about, the upper class, the feudal lords. Are you people motherfucking dense? What the fuck is your problem?? Are trying to get rid of the class system or what? If you are going to support the trampling of liberties at least have the damn common courtesy to actually look like you are trying to do what you think is so important that human rights must be curtailed. Holy living fuck!!!

US military budget 2006 = $441 billion
US total GDP 2006 = $13 trillion
US mb/gdp = 3.4%

Venezuelan military budget 2006 = $107 billion
Venezuelan total GDP 2006 = $4.2 billion
Venezuelan mb/gdp = 3.9%

>>17
oops i got those 2 mixed round lol

Venezuelan military budget 2006 = $4.2 billion
Venezuelan total GDP 2006 = $107 billion
Venezuelan mb/gdp = 3.9%

>>17
Yes, it is troublesome that he rules by decree now. Its only for 18 months though (he has six more years as president if they dont change the constitution which his decree cannot be used for) and he has ruled by decree before and succeded in not turning Venezuela into N Korea. I would say that this deoes not suffice for the tyrant title. US presidents have the executive order power which is kinda close to the decree, are they borderline tyrants?

And I googled and found this nifty list on nationmaster http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/mil_exp_per_of_gdp-military-expenditures-percent-of-gdp . In that venezueala has only 0,9% of gdp in military expenditures, but it is based on CIA world factbook of 2005 so i guess it has increased since then. Its still very much lower  than US allies like Saudi Arabia (13%) and Israel (8,75%). I thought Israel was the only democracy in the region, but hey they live in a tyranny! And if the aggresive neighbour excuse will be used i refer to my initial reaction to the arms expenditures of Venezuela in >>14.

>>19
The difference is congress can end or ignore an executive order and if the president vetos their decision if they have 2/3s majority opposition to it the veto is null. The president can only be a civilian dictator for a day and is unlikely to do much more than make one law based on the situation at the time which will probably be ignored afterwards unless the president wants to risk his reputation.

Compare this to Chavez's 18 months with his attempts to control the nation's media, polarise all the nation's political parties so there are no competing socialist parties and claims anything and everything is an imperialist. Chavez has not earned the right to rule by decree, he will not do what the people want and he has not done anything significant for the poor who voted him in. 8 years on and corruption hasn't changed, crime is terrible, there are still many problems with water, electricity and healthcare. The things he has done are rudimentary at best and the businesses that used to run them are sufferring and as a result less efficient than they were before Chavez.

Te Venezuelan government is afloat due to it's monopoly over the nation's crude oil. Except instead of making the most of their profits their government is squanderring it inefficiently. Fluctuations in demand for oil will generate instability and Chavez's regime will resort to tyranny to hold on to power and profits. Same shit different asshole.

>>20
We shall see. The long range oil demand trend is pointing up and it is not likely to change the nearest decade (if aggresive implementation of environmental technology is not assumed). He is not a tyrant just because you dont agree with his policies. He got elected on the promise that he would do radiacal changes to the venezuelan society, and he promised that he would do them fast. So it can be argued that the decree is what the voters elected him for. And economic inefficiency does not a tyrant make. And the owners to the nations private media is so hostile that they tried to coup him out power, the fact that those who did not flee to florida is not in camps now is evidence for him not being the frothing madman fox news tries to make him into. What would happen to Turner or Murdock if they tried to have the US president or the brittish premier ousted and declare themselvs rulers?

>>17
You forgot the US Emergency Supplemental Spending for FY2006; $72.4 billion, which doesn't get reported under the Defense Department's budget.  So in reality, US expenditure was:

US military budget 2006 = $441 billion + $72.4 billion = $513.4 billion
US total GDP 2006 = $13 trillion
US mb/gdp = 3.94%

Venezuelan military budget 2006 = $4.2 billion
Venezuelan total GDP 2006 = $107 billion
Venezuelan mb/gdp = 3.92%

About the same. 

But the real point should be whether Venezuela is a real threat to the US or its interests.  They ain't a military threat by any stretch.  The only threat is to 11% of our oil consumption, and working toward energy independence (which we could achieve within 3 decades) will fix that problem.

>>22
That's more like insurance, it's not as if they are going to spend it. Besides the US has a higher GDP per capita so that 4% doesn't make much difference whilst in Venezuela it pushes a few hundred thousand people under the poverty line.

>>22
Also Chavez like other oil producing nations sets his price competetively, he doesn't have the US by the balls.

>>22
The problem is not oil in it self, Venezuela is dependent on oil revenues and US is dependent on oil, they are both vulnurable. The real problem is what venezuela does with its revenues. The old geovernment invested the money in the US, just like saudi arabia does today. This way the owners earns a lot of money and the US gets back the money they used to purchase oil, win-win for the parties involved. What Chavez does is investing the money in Venezuela, thereby increasing the out flow of cash from the US. This is of course provoking and it is the real reason behind the hostility from Washington.

>Are trying to get rid of the class system or what?

Yes. Instead of your libertarian 'utopia' where 5% of the population have 99% of the wealth, Chavez wants to create a society in which all citizens have a good standard of living. That means taxing the people who have gotten rich from exploiting workers and using that money to build schools, roads, and hospitals. The poor will still be poor for a time, but they will at least be able to feed their families and have something to look forward to.

Eventually, a strong middle class can turn Venezuela into a cultural and economic power. The US doesn't want this. Once we get done subjugating the Iranians, Venezuela will have to deal with war if our sabotage and assassination attempts fail. So, it makes sense to invest in weapons.

>>26
Given this philosophy, I see no reason not to kill socialists on sight.

>>27
socialists? where build schools, roads, and hospitals is the same thing mexico its doing since president salinas de gortari so i guess mexico its socialist to .l.

I thought this was supposed to be a thread about who'd win in a fistfight, Chavez or Bush.

>>29
i'd go for chavez on that one. i think bush may have a better height, but where he was in the airforce the what? 6 years or something, chavez has a 17 years long military career from a member of a counter-insurgency batallion to a lt. colonel.

yeah i'd say chavez.

>>30
But they are world leaders! Surely they should not resort to simple pugilism, rather should they solve it like gentlemen and play a game of chess... Chavez would still win though.

>>31
Bush would win if they played civilisation 4. Bush can declare war as a democracy and not suffer a happiness penalty.

>>30

Yeah, in an actual fight Chavez wins easy.

Best case scenario is they kill each other though.

chavez wioll fuck that pussy bush up