The United States has captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and flown him out of the country in a stunning military operation that plucked a sitting leader from office following months of escalating Trump administration pressure on the oil-rich South American nation.
I guess. Because most countries in the region would have gone for that option just fine. It’s not like Maduro has a particularly solid claim to his seat. Half the country and a bunch of even fairly left-leaning governments would have thought supporting the internal factions with a legitimate claim for electoral victory was a harsh but reasonable outcome.
And yet they went with “massive airstrike followed by a ground incursion to kidnap the guy” instead.
And we know that Venezuela is going to be carved up like a turkey, because Machado said that Venezuela has a “'unique’ $1.7 trillion opportunity to privatize over 500 companies”
Well, let’s see who is in charge in Venezuela by next week, if anybody, and then we can talk about that. It’s one thing to… and again, holy shit, kidnap the sitting president and his wife, and another to enact a regime change without all-out violence.
Anyone who says they know what happens next is probably lying. Trump very much included.
Insane that people in Venezuela don’t hear that and immediately understand that they will literally be siphoning that money from them directly. It’s literally their money.
FWIW, I don’t think it’d be a particularly unpopular opinion to support an intervention of some kind after the presidential election went the way it went. There are still plenty of people out there disingenuously pretending this is that.
But this is obviously not that. This is absolute insanity.
Oh Im sure there will be way more of them to come around.
Edit- scrolled down. Enough idiots to go around surely. Imagine being so fucking dumb you equate the two parties like this. These people are so insanely fucking stupid it hurts the brain.
In what universe would Harris bomb Venezuela and kidnap Nicolás Maduro and his wife? Are you nuts?
At some point the people just doubling down on this train of thought just make me reassess how warped and delusional the argument was during the actual election. I guess when you have the luxury of a hypothetical you can just go forever. Trump will pass a law requiring him to rub his bare ass onto every single female politician and these guys will be going “do you really not think Harris would have her hairy asshole pushed onto people as well?”
Ah, we’ve moved on to the “maybe they wouldn’t have done this batshit crazy thing, but they would have done other things that are bad, so they’re the same”.
Except, obviously, a good way of telling that two things aren’t the same is that they’re different. Also, in cased you missed it, Trump bombed Nigeria on Christmas day. So this isn’t an “or” thing, this is an “and” thing.
Only clones are exacly the same. It is a fact that the US is sn imperlist power who love to destabilize and destroy other countries supported by the two political cults you have
But there are differences between both US political parties, and given the choice, any non-American should absolutely be hoping the actively fascist party loses, obviously.
The notion that they’re both equivalent is so farcical it didn’t hold up to any scrutiny at the time when it mattered, and anybody that pushed that notion then is now partially responsible for this whole mess.
If you are not american that is even worse to defend one of the two cults.
Edit: Nobody said they are exatly the same. The democratic cult is better on domestic affairs but when it come to imperialism they are similar both was involved in bombing and destroying other countries
No, it’s not, that’s not how that works. If one side is ideologically unpalatable and the other side is a gaggle of crazy fascists it’s perfectly valid to propose that one of the two sides is better than the other. Especially if you don’t have as much of a vested interest in domestic reform.
Trump will pass a law requiring him to rub his bare ass onto every single female congressman and these guys will be going “do you really not think Harris would have her hairy asshole pushed onto people as well?”
I see, you don’t understand the difference between domestic policy and foreign policy.
No faction in the US represents my interests, on account of my not being American.
But man, if I have to choose which faction is more likely to, say, roll up with tanks into Greenland, annex Canada or, and I can’t repeat this enough, bomb Caracas and kidnap Nicolás Maduro and his goddamn wife, I am pretty sure there is a single correct answer.
America is potentially a democracy when it comes to internal affairs but it is absolutely an autocracy from a foreign affairs standpoint since there are only two national level political parties and they have the same foreign policy.
They demonstrably do not, on account of one of the two just having, and I can’t believe I have to keep typing this out, just kidnapped the president of Venezuela and his wife.
I am pretty sure that’s not some bipartisan policy. That’s the ending of a Metal Gear sequel.
That’s the lesson, isn’t it? People just say things online, and the things need to get entirely dissociated from basic reality before it starts showing that they’re just things people say on the Internet.
Screw under-16s. Social media should be banned altogether.
The de facto outcome is the same. A coup would have been staged regardless. The Republicans add a kidnapping for flair / to look good in the eyes of their supporters. In the end the outcome is neocolonialism / American corporate access to resources regardless. The overall geopolitical strategy remains indistinguishable.
I fully believe that you can write fan fiction for evil dems that will take you to whatever arbitrary ending this situation happens to have.
It’s a prodigious stretch to argue that “the outcome is the same” at this point, though. Especially since there is every justification for a solution without Maduro in power that isn’t an illegitimate coup. Because… you know, Maduro did not have legitimacy in the first pace, arguably.
But hey, who cares about details like what was actually happening or what people actually said or did, right? If you squint hard enough it all blurs together sufficiently to keep posting simplistic crap online.
Let’s not get lost in the weeds here. Trump has said that the US is “going to run” Venezuela until a safe proper and judicious transition can occur. Who will power be transferred to? Almost certainly Machado who has already verbalized her willingness to be a Trump/US vassal. This outcome would have happened under a democratic government also, +/- capturing Maduro. It’s not like the US has not captured heads of state to install their puppets before (Panama, as one of many examples).
Venezuela has 20% of global oil and has been selling 65 to 80% of its supply to China over the past several years. It nationalized its oil reserves decades ago which is typically considered a grave sin from the Western perspective (as Iran learned in the 50s). If we’re honestly reflecting on how America handles a situation like this, especially when it’s happened in their own hemisphere, it’s obvious that the elected political party has little impact on this geopolitical outcome.
See, unlike people willing to retroactively support their preferred choices I am making zero assumptions about what’s going to happen.
What Trump says is going to happen and what happens don’t necessarily line up, and there is zero indication that under a different US regime the outcome would be anywhere close to Maduro being deposed. That ship seemed to have very thoroughly sailed at the time of the election.
And certainly, CERTAINLY not this way. Not by kidnapping Maduro by force and hoping that somehow the internal opposition groups are spooked enough to put forward zero resistance to an opposition government as a US puppet. Even if that is nominally implemented at any point, that’s a whole bunch of new ships that need sailing.
So no, not at all the same, not at all an outcome you would have expected from a dem government and not at all something consistent with US geopolitical stances in the past what? thirty, forty years?
The one thing I’ve learned today is that cosplay online leftists will say pretty much anything and that I’m pretty sure any even vaguely left of center leader in the Americas is currently re-reading their emergency protocols. Including those in Canada. And certainly in Greenland.
The US has an imperial neocolonial legacy of overthrowing governments for access to natural resources. This is consistent with that legacy. Surely we can agree on that much, if we’re living in the same reality.
That geopolitical strategy persists regardless of which political party is in power. It may not have played out exactly in this way but the outcome of a US friendly government being installed so that US companies can access local resources has recurred so often it’s the most predictable part of the US foreign policy playbook.
I think you’re primarily addressing the capture of Maduro. While that’s not always a component of the US approach to ovethrowing a government, it’s relatively immaterial to the outcome of installing a US puppet and gaining access to local resources. The US can achieve that with or without theatrics though we know Trump will almost always choose the theatrical option.
My argument is the outcome would be the same regardless of political party. You’re arguing that the particulars would be different with the Dems - sure. But the outcome, from a US national interest and geopolitical perspective, is the same.
So on what stage of deflection are the “Trump and Biden/Harris are exactly the same” locals at this point? Anybody keeping track?
it’s the wrong time of day in russia to get an answer ask again in a few hours
Trump didn’t have the patience for a CIA-backed coup
What makes you think the CIA didn’t orchestrate and activate this?
I guess. Because most countries in the region would have gone for that option just fine. It’s not like Maduro has a particularly solid claim to his seat. Half the country and a bunch of even fairly left-leaning governments would have thought supporting the internal factions with a legitimate claim for electoral victory was a harsh but reasonable outcome.
And yet they went with “massive airstrike followed by a ground incursion to kidnap the guy” instead.
So… you know, that’s a difference, one would say.
And we know that Venezuela is going to be carved up like a turkey, because Machado said that Venezuela has a “'unique’ $1.7 trillion opportunity to privatize over 500 companies”
Well, let’s see who is in charge in Venezuela by next week, if anybody, and then we can talk about that. It’s one thing to… and again, holy shit, kidnap the sitting president and his wife, and another to enact a regime change without all-out violence.
Anyone who says they know what happens next is probably lying. Trump very much included.
Insane that people in Venezuela don’t hear that and immediately understand that they will literally be siphoning that money from them directly. It’s literally their money.
It’s going to trickle down eventually /s
idk if harris would’ve bombed venezuela, but i know that if she did y’all would be defending it
presumably at brunch
You do know it.
Be honest for a second.
You know.
FWIW, I don’t think it’d be a particularly unpopular opinion to support an intervention of some kind after the presidential election went the way it went. There are still plenty of people out there disingenuously pretending this is that.
But this is obviously not that. This is absolute insanity.
deleted by creator
What a profoundly stupid and uninformed thing to assert.
Oh Im sure there will be way more of them to come around.
Edit- scrolled down. Enough idiots to go around surely. Imagine being so fucking dumb you equate the two parties like this. These people are so insanely fucking stupid it hurts the brain.
Yeah, definitely not true.
You really think Harris wouldn’t have done this? Because AmeriKKKa is uniparty in terms of foreign policy.
Yes, you weirdo.
In what universe would Harris bomb Venezuela and kidnap Nicolás Maduro and his wife? Are you nuts?
At some point the people just doubling down on this train of thought just make me reassess how warped and delusional the argument was during the actual election. I guess when you have the luxury of a hypothetical you can just go forever. Trump will pass a law requiring him to rub his bare ass onto every single female politician and these guys will be going “do you really not think Harris would have her hairy asshole pushed onto people as well?”
We live in the dumbest dystopia.
Obama bombed multiple african country. Maybe Harris eould have not attacked Venezuela but she could bomb other countries
Also let see how many establishment dems will condemn the abduction
Ah, we’ve moved on to the “maybe they wouldn’t have done this batshit crazy thing, but they would have done other things that are bad, so they’re the same”.
Except, obviously, a good way of telling that two things aren’t the same is that they’re different. Also, in cased you missed it, Trump bombed Nigeria on Christmas day. So this isn’t an “or” thing, this is an “and” thing.
Only clones are exacly the same. It is a fact that the US is sn imperlist power who love to destabilize and destroy other countries supported by the two political cults you have
Yes, nobody denied that and defended it here
Who is “you”? I’m not American.
But there are differences between both US political parties, and given the choice, any non-American should absolutely be hoping the actively fascist party loses, obviously.
The notion that they’re both equivalent is so farcical it didn’t hold up to any scrutiny at the time when it mattered, and anybody that pushed that notion then is now partially responsible for this whole mess.
If you are not american that is even worse to defend one of the two cults.
Edit: Nobody said they are exatly the same. The democratic cult is better on domestic affairs but when it come to imperialism they are similar both was involved in bombing and destroying other countries
No, it’s not, that’s not how that works. If one side is ideologically unpalatable and the other side is a gaggle of crazy fascists it’s perfectly valid to propose that one of the two sides is better than the other. Especially if you don’t have as much of a vested interest in domestic reform.
That’s an absurdly childish stance.
There he is!
Unironically yes
The one where I wasn’t born yesterday
I see, you don’t understand the difference between domestic policy and foreign policy.
You… think the differentiating element there is domestic vs foreign policy? That’s the objection you…
… you know what? I rest my case.
No, I think you’ve been duped by one faction of the capitalist class into thinking they represent your interests.
No faction in the US represents my interests, on account of my not being American.
But man, if I have to choose which faction is more likely to, say, roll up with tanks into Greenland, annex Canada or, and I can’t repeat this enough, bomb Caracas and kidnap Nicolás Maduro and his goddamn wife, I am pretty sure there is a single correct answer.
Yeah, the correct answer is both of them, since both parties are subservient to the will of the capitalist class.
Man, save me from cosplayers playing at revolution online.
It’s embarrassing, you know? Like watching your little child try to act like you and accidentally exposing all your garbage.
America is potentially a democracy when it comes to internal affairs but it is absolutely an autocracy from a foreign affairs standpoint since there are only two national level political parties and they have the same foreign policy.
They demonstrably do not, on account of one of the two just having, and I can’t believe I have to keep typing this out, just kidnapped the president of Venezuela and his wife.
I am pretty sure that’s not some bipartisan policy. That’s the ending of a Metal Gear sequel.
That’s the lesson, isn’t it? People just say things online, and the things need to get entirely dissociated from basic reality before it starts showing that they’re just things people say on the Internet.
Screw under-16s. Social media should be banned altogether.
The de facto outcome is the same. A coup would have been staged regardless. The Republicans add a kidnapping for flair / to look good in the eyes of their supporters. In the end the outcome is neocolonialism / American corporate access to resources regardless. The overall geopolitical strategy remains indistinguishable.
I fully believe that you can write fan fiction for evil dems that will take you to whatever arbitrary ending this situation happens to have.
It’s a prodigious stretch to argue that “the outcome is the same” at this point, though. Especially since there is every justification for a solution without Maduro in power that isn’t an illegitimate coup. Because… you know, Maduro did not have legitimacy in the first pace, arguably.
But hey, who cares about details like what was actually happening or what people actually said or did, right? If you squint hard enough it all blurs together sufficiently to keep posting simplistic crap online.
Let’s not get lost in the weeds here. Trump has said that the US is “going to run” Venezuela until a safe proper and judicious transition can occur. Who will power be transferred to? Almost certainly Machado who has already verbalized her willingness to be a Trump/US vassal. This outcome would have happened under a democratic government also, +/- capturing Maduro. It’s not like the US has not captured heads of state to install their puppets before (Panama, as one of many examples).
Venezuela has 20% of global oil and has been selling 65 to 80% of its supply to China over the past several years. It nationalized its oil reserves decades ago which is typically considered a grave sin from the Western perspective (as Iran learned in the 50s). If we’re honestly reflecting on how America handles a situation like this, especially when it’s happened in their own hemisphere, it’s obvious that the elected political party has little impact on this geopolitical outcome.
See, unlike people willing to retroactively support their preferred choices I am making zero assumptions about what’s going to happen.
What Trump says is going to happen and what happens don’t necessarily line up, and there is zero indication that under a different US regime the outcome would be anywhere close to Maduro being deposed. That ship seemed to have very thoroughly sailed at the time of the election.
And certainly, CERTAINLY not this way. Not by kidnapping Maduro by force and hoping that somehow the internal opposition groups are spooked enough to put forward zero resistance to an opposition government as a US puppet. Even if that is nominally implemented at any point, that’s a whole bunch of new ships that need sailing.
So no, not at all the same, not at all an outcome you would have expected from a dem government and not at all something consistent with US geopolitical stances in the past what? thirty, forty years?
The one thing I’ve learned today is that cosplay online leftists will say pretty much anything and that I’m pretty sure any even vaguely left of center leader in the Americas is currently re-reading their emergency protocols. Including those in Canada. And certainly in Greenland.
The US has an imperial neocolonial legacy of overthrowing governments for access to natural resources. This is consistent with that legacy. Surely we can agree on that much, if we’re living in the same reality.
That geopolitical strategy persists regardless of which political party is in power. It may not have played out exactly in this way but the outcome of a US friendly government being installed so that US companies can access local resources has recurred so often it’s the most predictable part of the US foreign policy playbook.
I think you’re primarily addressing the capture of Maduro. While that’s not always a component of the US approach to ovethrowing a government, it’s relatively immaterial to the outcome of installing a US puppet and gaining access to local resources. The US can achieve that with or without theatrics though we know Trump will almost always choose the theatrical option.
My argument is the outcome would be the same regardless of political party. You’re arguing that the particulars would be different with the Dems - sure. But the outcome, from a US national interest and geopolitical perspective, is the same.
The word “potentially” is doing a lot of lifting here 😆