I think that, although you are having a good intentioned vision, it is quite naive in the political landscape, and even worse, it is an idea that can bring more harm to the people than benefits.

No country or group of countries should act as policemen of the world, that would place them in a position of moral superiority to say that it is good and that it is bad, and that it should be done, in such a way that anyone who had an opinion different from them would be oppressed.

Have you seen some of the things that the government of the United States does in Guantanamo? Who do you think would be able to prevent the world's greatest power from breaking human rights? Do you think that if China or Russia, on the other hand, violated human rights, someone would be able to avoid it?

The UN, or any international organization, lacks armies (and it is impossible for them to have one), and even worse, morality, to be policemen.

Countries like the United States could intervene effectively in countries like Venezuela, if that is what you are thinking, but there are several factors that you don't take into consideration; Are the citizens of the United States in favor of having their money used to invade a country? Are the citizens of the United States in favor of starting a war that promises not to be at all different from the failures seen in countries like Iraq or Libya? Is the United States able to intervene in a country based on the international panorama? And if it is not the United States to which you refer; Which other would be the country or countries?

If countries like the United States invaded Venezuela today, even if for good reasons, a lot of countries around the globe began to fear, even more than they do today, of North American interventionism, reducing their power worldwide, turning the United States into a threat to all countries of medium and small military capacity (if it is not already), and giving more arguments and influences to countries like China or Russia.

The situation in Venezuela can be exasperating, and it may seem that interventionism is a good option, but it never is, interventionism is never, ever, a good option.

The Venezuelan people got used to having the State solve the problems, step of paternalistic dictatorships like those of Gomez and Perez Jimenez, to the infamous social-democracy of the 40 years, to then fall into a socialism very similar to the previous one, although more radical and totalitarian. As you can see, the Venezuelan people have always expected others to solve things; be the State or a leader, and now it would be a foreign power, but if it is not the people themselves who rise up and demand their rights, the only thing that will happen is that the same vices that have been repeated up to now will turn to repeat.Suppose that a successful intervention is carried out, nothing will prevent the Venezuelan people from choosing a Chavez in the future, and worse, that this time there is more hatred towards the West because of the intervention.

I really regret having extended so much, although I did not want to leave my idea incomplete.