What is the safest country to visit in South America? This will

>>1180343
They're all safe enough, unless you're a total idiot. Only Venezuela is dangerous right now.

>>1180343
Conesur region (Chile, Argentina and Uruguay), but I've heard Buenos Aires are not that safe anymore.

>>1180355
Really? That's interesting, I didn't know that about Buenos Aires. I was looking into Peru but it's really cliche, Patagonia is really expensive, Easter Island/Santiago trip might be fun, not really interested in the gelapagos islands since tourism is destroying the environment there. I really want to go to Brazil but am nervous because of stories I've heard.

File: download.jpg (13KB, 318x159px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 318x159px

>>1180343
>Implies having been to Africa
>worried South America is unsafe

I am guessing you've only dipped your toes in each continent.
In any case, safe ones are Colombia, Peru, Bolivia, Chile, Argentine.

Exercise commonsense. Don't carry around a massive DSLR then wonder where you wallet went. Wear a money belt, be descret with money.

Uruguay

This is probably a stupid question but should I get any vaccinations to visit South America ?

>>1180357
Not that poster but from what I've heard Buenos Aires has a junkie problem since a lot of coke production has moved to Argentina and the shitty leftover base ends up staying in country where urban poor use it.

File: victimizacion-regional-2014-1.jpg (165KB, 464x599px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 464x599px

>>1180355
>Conesur region (Chile, Argentina and Uruguay)

no. First of all "Cono sur" is a meme. Chile doesn't actually has that much to do with Argentina/Uruguay (or, at least, not much more than with, say, Peru).

regarding homicide rates, the four countries with the lowest ones in South America are Chile, Ecuador, Peru and Bolivia, not Argentina or Uruguay.

regarding other crimes, the stats are very variable, but in most charts, "Cone Sur" countries aren't the most safe (one example is pic related).

regarding the question, it's not about countries. South American countries are very big, heterogeneous, with big inequalities. You would be safer in some town of Andean Venezuela than in some Bs As favela or Montevideo "cantegril".

It varies a lot between cities/regions and even between districts.

Everywhere I've been in South America has dangerous cities, but each of those dangerous cities has a few rich areas that are quite safe as long as you aren't a total moron. Go where you want to go, as long as it isn't venezuela you'll be fine.

>>1180369
With the exception of South Africa, for the most part I'd say that South American cities seem more dangerous than anywhere in Africa that's commonly visited for tourism (Southern/Eastern Africa). There's a whole culture of violence for economic gain that doesn't really exist to the same degree in other places.

>>1180376
Febre Amarela (yellow fever?), Malaria and Dengue at least.

You will suffer if you don't have a comfortable amount of money to spend. South America is not a place for budget travellers, unless you come from a 3rd world country and knows how to act.

>>1180343
[spoiler]falklands[/spoiler]

>>1180457
You have obviously never been to Peru or Bolivia.

>>1180462
I've been to Peru.

>>1180466
And it was cheap as hell, was it not? The only problem might be getting there. Tip: if you're in Europe go to Madrid first on ryanair or something.

>>1180376
>>1180457

in Colombia depends on the place you visit, in most cities these won't be needed (and the more altitude, the less need). on the other side if you go to Caño Cristales or some other jungle area, you'll probably need them.

Op here. I'm American and have been to 11 countries on 5 continents in the last 3 years. Im not a rich fag but I can afford a king sized bed in a hotel in tokyo. (Just got back). Africa, I went to Cape town.