one thing we know for sure with these folks, assume maximum strategeryRaises the question: Was bagging Maduro worth revealing our capabilities?
one thing we know for sure with these folks, assume maximum strategeryRaises the question: Was bagging Maduro worth revealing our capabilities?
I still think the geopolitics were the primary driver and the oil was secondary. Venezuelan oil isn't the best investment going right now, regardless of who is in charge over there. The infrastructure is a crumbling mess and it will take billions to get that operation working efficiently. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if some oil companies respond to the offer with, "thanks, but no thanks." It can be hard getting investments like this when the entire fossil fuel industry is under constant attack.It should be pretty obvious to anybody paying attention by now that this was primarily done for the oil.
If it was done because of drug trafficking then why did trump pardon a convicted drug trafficker,former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez. At Hernandez's sentencing, New York District Court Judge Kevin Castel noted that in shipping 400 tons of cocaine worth $10 billion to the United States, some “drove trucks, piloted boats, or flew airplanes loaded with cocaine.”
If it was done to further democracy then why is the old leadership, minus Maduro, still in place. We could have handed control to the legally elected opposition leader Maria Corina Machado.
China has long involvement in Brazil and owns a major meat packer there. They purchase a significant portion of their soy beans from Brazil and Argentina. It would be interesting to look at the amount of money they have loaned in South America through their Belt and Road Initiative. They are offering significantely better deals on financing infrastructure in developing countries than can be offered by the US.Keeping China out of South America seems like good US foreign policy to me.
I was about to bring up the pardoning of the Honduras drug lord. Trump supporters don’t care though because anything Biden did was bad and everything Trump does is a blessing from Jesus Christ.It should be pretty obvious to anybody paying attention by now that this was primarily done for the oil.
If it was done because of drug trafficking then why did trump pardon a convicted drug trafficker,former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez. At Hernandez's sentencing, New York District Court Judge Kevin Castel noted that in shipping 400 tons of cocaine worth $10 billion to the United States, some “drove trucks, piloted boats, or flew airplanes loaded with cocaine.”
If it was done to further democracy then why is the old leadership, minus Maduro, still in place. We could have handed control to the legally elected opposition leader Maria Corina Machado.
I am coming to understand that a significant armed force exist in the Barrios of Venezuela that were armed originally by Hugo Chavez in the late 1990's. The Collectivas supported the Chavez revolution and are backers of Muduro. This is appears to me to be akin to Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. It will never be a peaceful democracy.Interesting details via NYT on why the Trump admin decided to not back María Corina Machado as Nicolas Maduro's replacement, and it has nothing to do with her winning the Noble Peace Prize:
-Trump was persuaded by arguments from senior officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who said that if the United States tried to back the opposition, it could further destabilize the country and require a more robust military presence inside the country. A classified C.I.A. intelligence analysis reflected that view
-Senior U.S. officials had grown frustrated with her assessments of Maduro’s strength, feeling that she provided inaccurate reports. They also grew skeptical of her ability to seize power in Venezuela.
-Richard Grenell, Trump’s envoy, met with Machado’s representatives and asked them to arrange an in-person meeting with Machado in Caracas and for a list of political prisoners they wanted liberated. But the in-person meeting never happened. Machado, despite promises from the American delegation that she would be protected, refused to meet with Grenell.
-Over time the relationship deteriorated, according to people briefed on the interactions. Machado and her team ignored the request for a list of political prisoners
-Grenell repeatedly pressed Machado to outline her plan for putting her surrogate candidate, Edmundo González, into office after she was barred from running. He grew frustrated when she expressed no concrete ideas of how to put the democratically elected government into power.
-Machado was upset that Grenell did not forcefully denounce Maduro as illegitimate. Grenell told colleagues that such a statement, while true, would have undercut his diplomatic outreach.
-Categorical rejection of any talks or contact with Maduro’s government has been a bedrock of Machado’s political strategy, but it has crippled her ability to build a broader coalition capable of enabling her bid for power.
-Machado’s unequivocal support of sanctions has destroyed her relations with Venezuela’s business elite, which had built a modus vivendi with Maduro to continue working in the country after a quarter-century of his government’s rule.
-Machado’s economic advisers have argued that every dollar going into Venezuela was a dollar for Mr. Maduro, a radical stance that had alienated many members of Venezuela’s civil society working to improve living conditions in the country. Her message had increasingly begun to mirror the views of the diaspora and deviated from the realities of people who remained in Venezuela.
-Machado’s team and allies in exile took to social media to attack and discredit public figures whose work deviated from their views. These actions cost Machado the support of members of the Democratic Party and many businesspeople, American and Venezuelan, who had interests in Venezuela and influence in Mr. Trump’s orbit.
-Orlando J. Pérez, a professor of political science at the University of North Texas at Dallas, said of Machado and her allies: “They don’t have the levers of power. They don’t have the institutions, and without us over assistance, they’re not going to get back into power in Venezuela.”
I agree; see my response to Bamaro a few posts above to see why I'm not sold on the importance of the oil here.I am coming to understand that a significant armed force exist in the Barrios of Venezuela that were armed originally by Hugo Chavez in the late 1990's. The Collectivas supported the Chavez revolution and are backers of Muduro. This is appears to me to be akin to Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. It will never be a peaceful democracy.
Why spend limited US funds there when all of the heavy oil we require lies in the tar sands of Alberta with transportation pipelines already in place.
This is nothing but a Trump- Rubio pipe dream.
Why is it that we focus on the suppliers of illegal drugs rather than the consumers? There is a market for drugs because we, as a society, want them. We pay for them...without the consumers there would be no dealers.I agree; see my response to Bamaro a few posts above to see why I'm not sold on the importance of the oil here.
Because politics, that's why. I find it difficult to believe that anybody in D.C. actually cared about the crack epidemic in L.A. or the meth epidemic in rural America. The people dying from this likely weren't voting anyway.Why is it that we focus on the suppliers of illegal drugs rather than the consumers? There is a market for drugs because we, as a society, want them. We pay for them...without the consumers there would be no dealers.
What is it in our society that makes us the largest drug consumers on the planet? Why will we not face up to that aspect of the problem?
Well put...to a large part our enemies define and unify us.The unifying principle of every society is war. War for resources. War for pride. War against drugs. There's a reason why we use this descriptor (war) for handling things we don't like and we very well can't declare war on a bunch of pitiable users.
In other words, in all his crowing about regime change and taking over their oil:Interesting details via NYT on why the Trump admin decided to not back María Corina Machado as Nicolas Maduro's replacement, and it has nothing to do with her winning the Noble Peace Prize:
-Trump was persuaded by arguments from senior officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who said that if the United States tried to back the opposition, it could further destabilize the country and require a more robust military presence inside the country. A classified C.I.A. intelligence analysis reflected that view
-Senior U.S. officials had grown frustrated with her assessments of Maduro’s strength, feeling that she provided inaccurate reports. They also grew skeptical of her ability to seize power in Venezuela.
-Richard Grenell, Trump’s envoy, met with Machado’s representatives and asked them to arrange an in-person meeting with Machado in Caracas and for a list of political prisoners they wanted liberated. But the in-person meeting never happened. Machado, despite promises from the American delegation that she would be protected, refused to meet with Grenell.
-Over time the relationship deteriorated, according to people briefed on the interactions. Machado and her team ignored the request for a list of political prisoners
-Grenell repeatedly pressed Machado to outline her plan for putting her surrogate candidate, Edmundo González, into office after she was barred from running. He grew frustrated when she expressed no concrete ideas of how to put the democratically elected government into power.
-Machado was upset that Grenell did not forcefully denounce Maduro as illegitimate. Grenell told colleagues that such a statement, while true, would have undercut his diplomatic outreach.
-Categorical rejection of any talks or contact with Maduro’s government has been a bedrock of Machado’s political strategy, but it has crippled her ability to build a broader coalition capable of enabling her bid for power.
-Machado’s unequivocal support of sanctions has destroyed her relations with Venezuela’s business elite, which had built a modus vivendi with Maduro to continue working in the country after a quarter-century of his government’s rule.
-Machado’s economic advisers have argued that every dollar going into Venezuela was a dollar for Mr. Maduro, a radical stance that had alienated many members of Venezuela’s civil society working to improve living conditions in the country. Her message had increasingly begun to mirror the views of the diaspora and deviated from the realities of people who remained in Venezuela.
-Machado’s team and allies in exile took to social media to attack and discredit public figures whose work deviated from their views. These actions cost Machado the support of members of the Democratic Party and many businesspeople, American and Venezuelan, who had interests in Venezuela and influence in Mr. Trump’s orbit.
-Orlando J. Pérez, a professor of political science at the University of North Texas at Dallas, said of Machado and her allies: “They don’t have the levers of power. They don’t have the institutions, and without us over assistance, they’re not going to get back into power in Venezuela.”
That was Zelenskyy on Putin, actually.Zelensky's response was pretty good.
Yeah and the belt and road deal is failing.China has long involvement in Brazil and owns a major meat packer there. They purchase a significant portion of their soy beans from Brazil and Argentina. It would be interesting to look at the amount of money they have loaned in South America through their Belt and Road Initiative. They are offering significantely better deals on financing infrastructure in developing countries than can be offered by the US.
I believe Zelensky was asked about his thoughts on Maduro being arrested and his response was, "If the US can do that to a Venezuelan dictator, then they can do it to a Russian one."That was Zelenskyy on Putin, actually.