Trump and Venezuela.
- Thread starter ele
- Start date
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
Too effing true, Squire! I bet they have not thought this through. And I bet they have no appetite for the detailed, energy-sapping follow - through needed to avoid descent into anarchy. Trump wants a quick banner headline and on to the next outrageous thing he has dreamt up.
Trumpezuela
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-GA04)↱: "25 page indictment but no mention of fentanyl or stolen oil. Search it for yourself."
And it's true, DoJ did post the indictment↱. It's quite terrible.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-GA04)↱: "25 page indictment but no mention of fentanyl or stolen oil. Search it for yourself."
And it's true, DoJ did post the indictment↱. It's quite terrible.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
I agree with the sentiments expressed here but it doesn't seem to be a very balanced view. Surely you must realize that it can also turn to be an improvement. No one wanted Maduro either. It wouldn't be hard to make life for the average Venezuelan citizen better either.
It was a prosperous place in the 60s. Oil was then nationalized and run into the ground and the socialism squander of resources started and the extraction was underfunded and not maintained. There is plenty of room for improvement.
I was there a year or two before Chavez and it was better than now but it was rundown at dangerous at night in Caracas but less so elsewhere.
It was a prosperous place in the 60s. Oil was then nationalized and run into the ground and the socialism squander of resources started and the extraction was underfunded and not maintained. There is plenty of room for improvement.
I was there a year or two before Chavez and it was better than now but it was rundown at dangerous at night in Caracas but less so elsewhere.
Yes, yes, always look on the bright side of life.
Can we officially liberate Myanmar, and secure the Rohingya against genocide?
Or do they not have enough oil to offer? (There's lots of precious gems, though. Leave the rice, take the rubies, save the world. So, we all know no liberal is ever going to do that, right? Though it would be good to be able to trade for paw hsan hmwe, the pink rice. C'mon, take the rubies, buy off liberals with pink rice, liberate the oppressed, and finally drive a stake through the heart of the junta.)
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
If we had done this with Cuba, would you disagree that the Cuban people would have been better off? Are there any examples in our hemisphere where a forced socialist government have improved life for the citizens?
Are you implying that the US will just take the oil? The war in Iraq was a mistake but many said the US just wanted to take the oil. Did they?
Are your views based on rationality and data or ideology and emotion?
It's Not Difficult
Well, do remember, even the Bush administration said it was about the oil. And it's true, they even fucked up that part, too.
Meanwhile, Miles Taylor↱ observes—
—and Rep. Massie↱ reminds:
This isn't difficult.
Well, do remember, even the Bush administration said it was about the oil. And it's true, they even fucked up that part, too.
Meanwhile, Miles Taylor↱ observes—
Rubio: This is about a dictator who oppresses his people.
Hegseth: It's about drugs that pose an imminent threat.
Trump: Nah, it's about oil.
Hegseth: It's about drugs that pose an imminent threat.
Trump: Nah, it's about oil.
—and Rep. Massie↱ reminds:
If this action were constitutionally sound, the Attorney General wouldn't be tweeting that they've arrested the President of a sovereign country and his wife for possessing guns in violation of a 1934 U.S. firearm law.
This isn't difficult.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
Sure, where Trump is concerned, you can always win the debating point (if that is important to you) because he is wildly inconsistent. When someone actually does something it can also go wrong or right. That's my point.
You don't see the possibility that "we" get the oil refinery infrastructure going again at capacity, that means a lot more money for the people who are in need in Venezuela, a more stable supply for the US, it cuts off the supply to Cuba immediately and Cuba could easily be a success story.
It should have been for all administrations from Kennedy on but no one has done anything effective. It's 90 miles from the US and should have a great economy. Cuba is probably next.
This story is potentially a lot more interesting than ..."Trump bad".
Are you excited about all the "good" things Mayor Katie Wilson has planned for Seattle? Will she turn things around?
TheVat
Valued Senior Member
What would be hard is for the US to actually engineer the replacement of the entire Maduro government - are they going to just kidnap all the corrupt? I mean, this is South America we're talking about. As exchemist notes, the MAGA regime is not up for all the grinding work of regime change. (I used the chess pigeon analogy in the 2.0 thread, which analogy has served well since the first Turnip admin) All the Meta Mucilini has done is set up a big beautiful bloodbath - that'll be great for Venezuela.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
I guess we'll see if things get better or worse. That's why it's interesting, it's an unknown.
Someone on CNN was suggesting that they may be trying to avoid the scenario that is broadly accepted to have happened in Irak where the previous administration was removed root and branch to be built up again.
So they seem to be trying to work with (elements of?) Maduro's administration and in all likelihood the main aim is to get the oil flowing with their cooperation.
Even if that is desirable (in economic terms it might be -in their terms) I can't see how they get there without fighting the Maduro's military (and backers)
Perhaps if there was a civil war the combined forces of the opposition to Maduro (do they even exist,militarily?) along with some American boots on the ground could lead to the defeat of the Maduro forces.
But why not just accept the opposition who won the last election ?Apparently they want control over their own resources(imagine that!)
Does this go back to Suez? I think Egypt won that war and so the natural expectation may be for America to get the same bloody nose Britain and France got back in 1956 if they try to play the same hand.
I also wonder if Venezuela would become a magnet for anti-American combatants from around the world (especially S.America) and so lead to a wider conflict ...
I was actually surprised to learn that anti American sentiment is not so high in S America so perhaps that scenario might not play out and a way might be found to install a puppet regime ,but only after quite a lot of bloodshed and with a population alienated from their own government probably as badly then as they are now.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
Usually, in a country like that, the military is more like the civil service or "stable" government. When someone like Maduro comes in, there is a much smaller group that is attached and loyal to him. Deal with them either via fighting or just offer, pensions, immunity, passage out of the country, whatever and it's more likely the military will just back up whoever is next.
For example with Cuba, it's likely that you could deal with the top 1,000 "leaders" the way I have suggested above and then the rest aren't a problem. The ordinary person just wants stability and a better life/environment. The military is the "government" in some countries (like Thailand).
For example with Cuba, it's likely that you could deal with the top 1,000 "leaders" the way I have suggested above and then the rest aren't a problem. The ordinary person just wants stability and a better life/environment. The military is the "government" in some countries (like Thailand).
I haven't seen much commentary yet, but it strikes me that what the Trump regime has done is very probably illegal under international law for all kinds of reasons. No doubt we'll be hearing more about that soon.
Not that adhering to international law - or following the domestic law in general - has ever bothered the Trump administration.
Not that adhering to international law - or following the domestic law in general - has ever bothered the Trump administration.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
Nor should it necessarily regarding the "international law". That generally just means excuses for doing nothing and letting the authoritarians take over, as in Venezuela, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, etc.
Well, no. There are very general principles of law, such as the principle that the people of a nation have a right to self-determination, and the principle that all wars are illegal and the use of force is only permissible in self-defence of a nation.
International law says nothing about excuses for doing nothing. There is nothing about that in the UN Charter, for example.
International law says nothing about excuses for doing nothing. There is nothing about that in the UN Charter, for example.
Have faith. The anti-fascist[1] United Socialist Party of Venezuela is still in control. Maduro stocked the military and militias with devoted members. And that fossil-fuel behemoth known as Greenland will still refuse to place itself up for auction.
Also note that those who pejoratively framed "No Kings" as being absolute in its commitment (unbridled cynicism about authoritarian leaders) have been demonstrated wrong: "Free Maduro! Free Maduro!"
So trepidation is groundless. The Nazi chieftan shot his wad, and the brick that toppled from the PSUV wall was easily replaced. The aftershocks of the supposedly great earth rumble grow weaker by the hour.
- - - footnote - - -
[1] "Maduro denounced Washington for spreading 'extremist currents and Nazi tendencies' that he said endanger South America and the Caribbean. He argued that Venezuela is defending not only itself, but also the rights of peoples across the region."
_
Last edited:
Well, at least we're not talking about the Epstein files any more. How bad must his involvement in them be if he feels the need to take over another country so as to distract.
And, yes, beyond that it's all about the oil. Iraq was mostly about the oil as well, resulting in the Iraq oil trade opening up to the West, primarily through US companies, with vast wealth stripped from the Iraqis as a result. Primarily for the US to benefit. Will the US simply "steal" or "size" the oil in Venezuela? No, but they will ensure their own companies are heavily involved, that the US gets excellent access at very favourable trade terms, and, well, who knows how much corruption will be involved to even further enrich US people/entities. Just as in Iraq. It's not about the drugs. It's not about oppression.
Maybe the mayor/head of Greenland should be worried that the US will now extradite them and insert their own leader, and then grant the US unfettered access to Greenland's mineral wealth?
But at least we're not talking about the Epstein files.
And, yes, beyond that it's all about the oil. Iraq was mostly about the oil as well, resulting in the Iraq oil trade opening up to the West, primarily through US companies, with vast wealth stripped from the Iraqis as a result. Primarily for the US to benefit. Will the US simply "steal" or "size" the oil in Venezuela? No, but they will ensure their own companies are heavily involved, that the US gets excellent access at very favourable trade terms, and, well, who knows how much corruption will be involved to even further enrich US people/entities. Just as in Iraq. It's not about the drugs. It's not about oppression.
Maybe the mayor/head of Greenland should be worried that the US will now extradite them and insert their own leader, and then grant the US unfettered access to Greenland's mineral wealth?
But at least we're not talking about the Epstein files.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
The Iraqi war cost more than any contract benefit to US companies. Of course , we get involved in areas that effect our national interests in commerce and that's why were were in Kuwait and not in South Sudan. What's new?
And...?
Most other countries get "involved" in such areas of commerce through, um, commercial agreements. Trade talks etc. The US under the Trump? Hmmm. Not so much.
But, hey, it's an appeal to the base that likes to see the US "kick ass... with guns!!" while the test of the world are just watching a live-action even-more-parody version of "Team America".
But at least he's deflected from the Epstein files.
