Hugo Chavez is Dead

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#51 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (7722 posts) -

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="sonicare"] It may be true. Take a look at Castro. Dude has gray hair and wrinkles. He didnt have those 50 years ago when he was in favor with the US. I cant prove it, but I think they have some ray gun that can make a person age 50 years in 50 years.coolbeans90

You're trying too hard. There's nothing that far-fetched about him being poisoned considering the US has a history of doing shady stuff to other countries.

but . . . cancer?

Not as dangerous as our top secret gay bombs.
#52 Posted by comp_atkins (31200 posts) -

ricin yo'

-Sun_Tzu-
lily of the valley?
#53 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (7722 posts) -

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

but . . . cancer?

Aljosa23

Whether or not he was directly poisoned WITH cancer is probably unlikely but I wouldn't put it past them to poison him with stuff that increases the risk of cancer.

How exactly would that work and how effective would it be? There are far easier ways to 'poison' people. Why choose a method that would take years and possibly not even GIVE him cancer? The idea seems absurd to me.
#54 Posted by worlock77 (22547 posts) -

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

but . . . cancer?

Aljosa23

Whether or not he was directly poisoned WITH cancer is probably unlikely but I wouldn't put it past them to poison him with stuff that increases the risk of cancer.

Or maybe he just naturally got cancer. It tends to occur in humans.

#55 Posted by worlock77 (22547 posts) -

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

but . . . cancer?

HoolaHoopMan

Whether or not he was directly poisoned WITH cancer is probably unlikely but I wouldn't put it past them to poison him with stuff that increases the risk of cancer.

How exactly would that work and how effective would it be? There are far easier ways to 'poison' people. Why choose a method that would take years and possibly not even GIVE him cancer? The idea seems absurd to me.

Yep.

#56 Posted by dave123321 (33604 posts) -
aljosa watches too many bond movies, though agree with his general idea. Though maybe not for this specific case. Just it seems he arguing against what seems to be a general dismissal of something like this occurring today.
#57 Posted by Oleg_Huzwog (21885 posts) -

aljosa watches too many bond moviesdave123321

...says the guy who +1'd the sentiment.

#58 Posted by dave123321 (33604 posts) -

[QUOTE="dave123321"]aljosa watches too many bond moviesOleg_Huzwog

...says the guy who +1'd the sentiment.

I added to my comment
#59 Posted by Aljosa23 (24577 posts) -

How exactly would that work and how effective would it be? There are far easier ways to 'poison' people. Why choose a method that would take years and possibly not even GIVE him cancer? The idea seems absurd to me. HoolaHoopMan
I'm only speculating here but I'd imagine the constant threat of Venezuela stopping oil exports might have had something to do with it. So incase they did stop exports, Chavez would be dead soon and they could install a puppet dictator like what happened in Iran before the Revolution.

#60 Posted by Aljosa23 (24577 posts) -

aljosa watches too many bond movies, though agree with his general idea. Though maybe not for this specific case. Just it seems he arguing against what seems to be a general dismissal of something like this occurring today.dave123321
I'm not arguing that he was 100% poisoned without a doubt, I'm arguing that anything is possible since Chavez made quite a bit of enemies in his day.

#61 Posted by Fightingfan (38011 posts) -

Viva Fidel! Mi hermano! 

#62 Posted by dave123321 (33604 posts) -

[QUOTE="dave123321"]aljosa watches too many bond movies, though agree with his general idea. Though maybe not for this specific case. Just it seems he arguing against what seems to be a general dismissal of something like this occurring today.Aljosa23

I'm not arguing that he was 100% poisoned without a doubt, I'm arguing that anything is possible since Chavez made quite a bit of enemies in his day.

That is what I had assumed. Last sentence of my post was getting at that idea.
#63 Posted by JML897 (33120 posts) -

[QUOTE="dave123321"]aljosa watches too many bond moviesOleg_Huzwog

...says the guy who +1'd the sentiment.

Dave is a wildcard who changes his opinions a lot
#64 Posted by dave123321 (33604 posts) -
[QUOTE="Oleg_Huzwog"]

[QUOTE="dave123321"]aljosa watches too many bond moviesJML897

...says the guy who +1'd the sentiment.

Dave is a wildcard who changes his opinions a lot

I clarified the above statement
#65 Posted by VaguelyTagged (10070 posts) -

the less populist politicians out there, the better.

#66 Posted by worlock77 (22547 posts) -

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]How exactly would that work and how effective would it be? There are far easier ways to 'poison' people. Why choose a method that would take years and possibly not even GIVE him cancer? The idea seems absurd to me. Aljosa23

I'm only speculating here but I'd imagine the constant threat of Venezuela stopping oil exports might have had something to do with it. So incase they did stop exports, Chavez would be dead soon and they could install a puppet dictator like what happened in Iran before the Revolution.

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

#67 Posted by thegerg (14650 posts) -

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]How exactly would that work and how effective would it be? There are far easier ways to 'poison' people. Why choose a method that would take years and possibly not even GIVE him cancer? The idea seems absurd to me. Aljosa23

I'm only speculating here but I'd imagine the constant threat of Venezuela stopping oil exports might have had something to do with it. So incase they did stop exports, Chavez would be dead soon and they could install a puppet dictator like what happened in Iran before the Revolution.

So instead of waiting for reason to kill him, you think they would find it more reasonable to try to give him cancer on the chance that they might have reason to kill him in the future?
#68 Posted by Maniacc1 (5354 posts) -
Looking around at reactions online, it's almost hilarious how everyone becomes a comparative politics expert overnight. One of the most oil rich countries in the world is now up in the air. Should be fun.
#69 Posted by Aljosa23 (24577 posts) -

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

worlock77

Not really. Considering Iran's coup was all over oil and with Chavez being the main villain in South America during the Bush years it's certainly a possibility, albeit a small one.

#70 Posted by Aljosa23 (24577 posts) -

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]How exactly would that work and how effective would it be? There are far easier ways to 'poison' people. Why choose a method that would take years and possibly not even GIVE him cancer? The idea seems absurd to me. thegerg

I'm only speculating here but I'd imagine the constant threat of Venezuela stopping oil exports might have had something to do with it. So incase they did stop exports, Chavez would be dead soon and they could install a puppet dictator like what happened in Iran before the Revolution.

So instead of waiting for reason to kill him, you think they would find it more reasonable to try to give him cancer on the chance that they might have reason to kill him in the future?

Waiting for a reason to kill him would be too obvious but one could argue he did enough antagonizing during the Bush years to warrant being a target.

#71 Posted by osirisx3 (1739 posts) -

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

#72 Posted by sherman-tank1 (8097 posts) -

This will be interesting, as Venezuela had been training Hezbollah for attacks on the US. A

#73 Posted by sherman-tank1 (8097 posts) -

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

osirisx3

Ugh, Socialism.

#74 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (7722 posts) -

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]How exactly would that work and how effective would it be? There are far easier ways to 'poison' people. Why choose a method that would take years and possibly not even GIVE him cancer? The idea seems absurd to me. Aljosa23

I'm only speculating here but I'd imagine the constant threat of Venezuela stopping oil exports might have had something to do with it. So incase they did stop exports, Chavez would be dead soon and they could install a puppet dictator like what happened in Iran before the Revolution.

Speculate all you want, I'm sticking with absurd here. I think the easier answer here is "A 58 year old got cancer from natural causes". That idea, you know, makes sense.
#75 Posted by sherman-tank1 (8097 posts) -

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]How exactly would that work and how effective would it be? There are far easier ways to 'poison' people. Why choose a method that would take years and possibly not even GIVE him cancer? The idea seems absurd to me. HoolaHoopMan

I'm only speculating here but I'd imagine the constant threat of Venezuela stopping oil exports might have had something to do with it. So incase they did stop exports, Chavez would be dead soon and they could install a puppet dictator like what happened in Iran before the Revolution.

Speculate all you want, I'm sticking with absurd here. I think the easier answer here is "A 58 year old got cancer from natural causes". That idea, you know, makes sense.

Yeah, I don't understand why the US would use cancer to kill him when can they just straight out use a more effective way. Then again, maybe that was the point. Maybe they know people don't expect that, and that is why they did it. I don't think we will ever know.

#76 Posted by Aljosa23 (24577 posts) -

Speculate all you want, I'm sticking with absurd here. I think the easier answer here is "A 58 year old got cancer from natural causes". That idea, you know, makes sense. HoolaHoopMan
Well yeah, I never said I think he was assassinated or anything like that. The original post I quoted made it seem like the US would never do anything like that even though history says differently + a lot of shady things could have happened especially with a controversial figure like Chavez.

#77 Posted by thegerg (14650 posts) -

[QUOTE="thegerg"][QUOTE="Aljosa23"]I'm only speculating here but I'd imagine the constant threat of Venezuela stopping oil exports might have had something to do with it. So incase they did stop exports, Chavez would be dead soon and they could install a puppet dictator like what happened in Iran before the Revolution.

Aljosa23

So instead of waiting for reason to kill him, you think they would find it more reasonable to try to give him cancer on the chance that they might have reason to kill him in the future?

Waiting for a reason to kill him would be too obvious but one could argue he did enough antagonizing during the Bush years to warrant being a target.

Too obvious to who and in what way? The ridiculous plan you're suggesting still has him dying after he cuts off oil supplies. The alternative (that I've pointed out) is a scenario where he dies after cutting off the supplies, but lives if he doesn't, and doesn't rely on waiting for cancer to kill him at some specific, yet undefined, point.
#78 Posted by Riverwolf007 (23420 posts) -

[QUOTE="osirisx3"]

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

sherman-tank1

Ugh, Socialism.

lol, dude.... what do think social security and medicare is? 

 

#79 Posted by DroidPhysX (17088 posts) -

[QUOTE="osirisx3"]

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

sherman-tank1

Ugh, Socialism.

Roger-Goodell.jpg

#80 Posted by airshocker (28814 posts) -

Best news I've heard all year.

#81 Posted by Aljosa23 (24577 posts) -

Best news I've heard all year.

airshocker

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

#82 Posted by airshocker (28814 posts) -

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

Aljosa23

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.

#83 Posted by YoshiYogurt (5973 posts) -
#84 Posted by Netherscourge (16328 posts) -

And Fidel is still kickin'

lol

But seriously, i wont miss him.

Marmotas

 

OMG - I forgot he was still alive. I thought he died already.

#85 Posted by TheWalkingGhost (5046 posts) -
Glad to hear it, great day for us all. Never liked the douche bag, just another **** stirring borderline dictator dead. I will not mourn for him, nor anybody else that focuses more on starting crap with other countries and trying to undermine their economic well being. Good riddance to bad rubbish! (that includes all a**hole american presidents)
#86 Posted by SUD123456 (4399 posts) -

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]How exactly would that work and how effective would it be? There are far easier ways to 'poison' people. Why choose a method that would take years and possibly not even GIVE him cancer? The idea seems absurd to me. Aljosa23

I'm only speculating here but I'd imagine the constant threat of Venezuela stopping oil exports might have had something to do with it. So incase they did stop exports, Chavez would be dead soon and they could install a puppet dictator like what happened in Iran before the Revolution.

Explain the logic of this, pls. Specifically, why would a politician whose entire political base is built upon handouts to the poor...handouts which are funded by oil revenue...suddenly decide to destroy his main source of funding for everything he does? In fact, his track record was to do the exact opposite by nationalizing the industry thereby increasing his control over oil related revenue.

#87 Posted by Netherscourge (16328 posts) -

Curious as to how this will affect gas prices...

 

Oil companies always look for headlines to raise their prices, especially out of oil-producing countries.

#88 Posted by TheWalkingGhost (5046 posts) -

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

Best news I've heard all year.

Aljosa23

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

Grasping at straws.
#89 Posted by TheWalkingGhost (5046 posts) -

Curious as to how this will affect gas prices...

 

Oil companies always look for headlines to raise their prices, especially out of oil-producing countries.

Netherscourge
I am hoping the next guy won't try to undermine the US and we can get more leaders willing to work with everybody.
#90 Posted by cfstar (1979 posts) -

Best news I've heard all year.

airshocker

Yeah, people dying is just so f*cking br00tal and adgy and aweeeeeesome, braaaaah

#91 Posted by TheWalkingGhost (5046 posts) -

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

Best news I've heard all year.

cfstar

Yeah, people dying is just so f*cking and br00tal and adgy and aweeeeeesome, braaaaah

Grow up.
#92 Posted by Aljosa23 (24577 posts) -

Explain the logic of this, pls. Specifically, why would a politician whose entire political base is built upon handouts to the poor...handouts which are funded by oil revenue...suddenly decide to destroy his main source of funding for everything he does? In fact, his track record was to do the exact opposite by nationalizing the industry thereby increasing his control over oil related revenue.

SUD123456

I should have specified but he threatened plenty of times to stop exporting oil to the US. Just this past December imports from Venezuela reached a 30 year low.

#93 Posted by cfstar (1979 posts) -
[QUOTE="cfstar"]

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

Best news I've heard all year.

TheWalkingGhost

Yeah, people dying is just so f*cking and br00tal and adgy and aweeeeeesome, braaaaah

Grow up.

Cannot tell if this post is supposed to be funny or...
#94 Posted by dave123321 (33604 posts) -
[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

Best news I've heard all year.

TheWalkingGhost

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

Grasping at straws.

Aljosa's comment did seem rather random and off-base. Airshocker has more sense honor then to think like that.
#95 Posted by Aljosa23 (24577 posts) -

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

Best news I've heard all year.

TheWalkingGhost

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

Grasping at straws.

Naw I just like trolling airshocker at every opportunity. :>

#96 Posted by SUD123456 (4399 posts) -

[QUOTE="SUD123456"]

Explain the logic of this, pls. Specifically, why would a politician whose entire political base is built upon handouts to the poor...handouts which are funded by oil revenue...suddenly decide to destroy his main source of funding for everything he does? In fact, his track record was to do the exact opposite by nationalizing the industry thereby increasing his control over oil related revenue.

Aljosa23

I should have specified but he threatened plenty of times to stop exporting oil to the US. Just this past December imports from Venezuela reached a 30 year low.

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.

#98 Posted by TheWalkingGhost (5046 posts) -

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"][QUOTE="Aljosa23"]I bet your dislike of him basically amounts to "because Bush did."

Aljosa23

Grasping at straws.

Naw I just like trolling airshocker at every opportunity. :>

I like trolling as much as the next guy....But you have a way better reputation than I do, so I would advise against it.
#99 Posted by dave123321 (33604 posts) -

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"][QUOTE="Aljosa23"]I bet your dislike of him basically amounts to "because Bush did."

Aljosa23

Grasping at straws.

Naw I just like trolling airshocker at every opportunity. :>

He is a lovely individual. Please don't push him too far.