Talk:Military of Venezuela
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"This apparently refers to Venezuelan armies fighting Venezuela's independence war", IT refers to that, not "apparently" Moyako (talk) 07:24, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] older entries
"Clearly, this divergence is a sign of the current regime's anti-US policies."
How wonderful!!! I want to see Wikipedia write about "the current U.S. regime anti-Venezuela policies". Could you try to be a little less biased?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.118.134.98 (talk • contribs) 19:00, 13 July 2006.
- That's not being biased, that's being real. Anyone who says that Hugo Chavez is not anti-U.S. has been living under a rock. He doesn't even try to hide it. Also, please take into account that Wikipedia doesn't write these articles, people on Wikipedia do. I found the article to be quite factual and informative and without biased phrases.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.35.11.39 (talk • contribs) 19:40, 25 August 2006.
[edit] Moved here
This content isn't appropriate at Venezuela; moving it to here so it can be incorporated here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:44, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Venezuela's national armed forces include roughly 100,000 personnel spread through four service branches:
- the Ground Forces
- the Navy (including the Marine Corps)
- the Air Force,
- the Armed Forces of Cooperation (FAC), commonly known as the National Guard.
As of 2008, a further 600,000 soldiers were incorporated into a new fifth branch, known as the Armed Reserve; these troops bear more semblance to a militia than the older branches.
The President of Venezuela (Hugo Chavez) is the commander-in-chief of the national armed forces.
Since Hugo Chavez came into power, the military has been more reliable on countries that the US feel are a threat, for example:
But the military has tried to get corvettes and frigates from Spain, in which the US rejected and also other sanctions including:
- Ban on spare parts to F-16 fighters from United States and allies
- Ban on getting more AT4 and RBS-70 missiles from Sweden in which the military has in stock.
- Sanctioning purchases of Scorpene submarines from France
- Ban on purchases of L-159 training fighters from Czech Republic
In a response to the imposed sanctions the military has been purchasing Russian airplanes and helicopters such as:
- Mi-8/Mi-17 transport helicopters
- Mi-35 Hind attack helicopters
- Mi-26 transport helicopters
- Su-30 attack/fighter
- Su-35 fighter
- Proposal of buying russian, chinese and iranian apc's/tanks such as:
- Also the Venezulean military will produce 100.000+ AK-103 Assualt Rifles from Russia (Already in service)
- Also acquired TOR-M1 missile defense systems from Russia, China and Iran (Already in service)
- Will acquire Iranian UAV's in late 2007.
[edit] Standard Equipment
This paragraph seems not very clear to me. No army I have notice about massively issues sidearms to ordinary soldiers, except to those that cannot carry rifle due to the weight/space constraints. There are good reasons for it: inefectiveness of pistols as offensive weapons and high rate of accidents. So I don`t believe "averege soldier" has a Glock.
Also, it is not clear what "crew" means. FN MAG is a heavy machine gun, not a personal weapon for vehicle crew memebers to carry (it is too large, heavy and expensive for such role), although it may be installed on a vehicle itself. If the author reffers to supporting weapon crews, they may also be issued with mortars, recoiless anti-armored guns, missiles and a variety of weapons different from FN MAG. But MAG is never used as personal weapon.
It is also difficult to believe that the primary weapon of frontier units is something different from an assault or battle rifle, although shotguns, SMGs and pistols may be used to part of the troops. Are the information stated in this paragraph verifiable? M.Campos (talk) 12:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
using submachineguns, glock pistols or even shotguns in the frontline as a soldier is utterly stupid and will ceartainly lead to death. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.209.26.166 (talk) 21:19, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Does somebody oppose to entirely remove "Standard Equipment" section? M.Campos (talk) 12:07, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Since nobody replied, I understand it is OK to remove the "Standard Equipment" section, based on Wikipedia:Verifiability policy. I believe the information is wrong, but if the author may state reliable sources for it I will be happy to put the text back and also learn more about the subject. Follows the full text I removed:
"==Standard equipment==
- An average soldier will have a FN FAL and a Glock 17 as a sidearm and the crew service will carry a FN MAG instead of the FAL, although the FALs are now being replaced by the AK-103 in just about every branch.
- A frontier soldier will have a Glock 18 and a Mossberg 500 or an IMI Uzi."
M.Campos (talk) 14:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

