Deteriorating Situation in Venezuela

[conon394]

I don't think I even need to reply to that, given the bolded part showing how much you actually know about it.

On no noooo! Khaaaan! Wow HH you just schooled me on history I am so ashamed, from now on I will not criticize any of your erudite posts especially the one that support the tRump - oh wait sorry no its just the weed my brother in law sent me from WA and then finishing the mixed drinks my wife has taken to having before lunch while considering how her science dies (she pretty sure now its 2 years down the drain) on furlough that got me to me for a minute there... Man sorry really.

So FDR did not start an undeclared war with Nazi subs in the Atlantic? Back brutal sanctions on Japan over China? Blithely accept the UK blockade of Germany? Hand over military assets to the the UK for few crap islands. Enact Lend Lease. Nope no intervention at all you are right pure neutrality. I'm sure you will tell me I am reading the wrong history and there were not some what 30,000 or 40,000 thousand US troops in Iceland any war declared by Hitler or a US war declared on Iceland - R&R maybe?

So you support violence against civilians if you don't like their political beliefs? Well that's a surprise...

Well that interesting. So You support violence against civilians when Russia dislikes the political beliefs of civilians that are in quest - you avoided my question.

[Heathen Hammer]

If you want us to educate you on America's role in WW2 and shortly before it, you are free to start a thread in VV. Chechen wars could have easily been avoided if Yeltsin did something about it in 1991. Like I said military interventions rarely work, and in rare cases when they do there was usually a less costly alternative.

[conon394]

If you want us to educate you on America's role in WW2 and shortly before it, you are free to start a thread in VV

And if I want to watch you avoid a question I can post anywhere you have in response.

[Yayattasa]

Do tell us. Should we have let Nazis gas all of the Jews?

You didn't even know it was happening. Bogus argument.

[RandomPerson2000]

The principle of humanitarian intervention still stands. I pointed out examples of when we intervened or when we didn't intervene. The "bollocks regime change" in countries like Rwanda, Congo, and Sudan would've been perfectly acceptable considering the alternatives would've been letting millions die. Which we did. In cases of countries like Yemen, where millions are starving and dying, I don't give a what regime is put in place there, so long as we can bring stability to the country. It's in everyone's best interest to minimize violence.
"

To be honest, I'm not really sure an American intervention into Sudan to force regime change on its government perhaps during the 1990s or the 2000s, would have been the best of ideas to stabilise the country. There's too may variables to consider, it is possible that this intervention might go fine or it might create a power vacuum similar to what happened in Iraq after the US invasion, worsening the already rampant tribalism and perhaps increasing the number of Islamist militant groups, potentially dragging the US into a quagmire, despite the good intentions.

[Heathen Hammer]

And if I want to watch you avoid a question I can post anywhere you have in response.

What question? All you did was vaguely justify civilian massacres by saying they deserved for voting wrong way. I already addressed the issue with insurrection in Russia as well.

[Love Mountain]

To be honest, I'm not really sure an American intervention into Sudan to force regime change on its government perhaps during the 1990s or the 2000s, would have been the best of ideas to stabilise the country. There's too may variables to consider, it is possible that this intervention might go fine or it might create a power vacuum similar to what happened in Iraq after the US invasion, worsening the already rampant tribalism and perhaps increasing the number of Islamist militant groups, potentially dragging the US into a quagmire, despite the good intentions.

The issue with comparing interventions is that not every intervention can be compared. I'd argue that the biggest mistake in Libya was the unwillingness to commit to a ground operation. Only an overwhelming outside power could've stopped the violence and brought everyone to the table. This is a little different from Iraq where we simply smashed an otherwise stable regime. Saddam's war with the Kurds resulted in thousands of dead and hundreds of thousands siplaced, but that war was done and over with for a long time when we invaded. The destruction of Iraq resulted in wide anti-American sentiment, whereas NATO would've been seen as a liberator by at least a large part of the country in Libya.

When we look at places like Sudan, Congo, and Rwanda, we are reminded that the cost of inaction is magnitudes worse if we ignore cries for help. At the very least, we could've stopped the regime from slaughtering hundreds of thousands and put international observers there. Regime change isn't necessary to stop the violence.

[Heathen Hammer]

Interventions tend to happen.... for the sake of interventions. They usually happen to aid interests of ruling elites (like Qaddafi and Saddam messing with petrodollar) and/ or as an excuse to fund the Great Maw of American deep state/military-industrial complex. For example, Saudis in Yemen make 90s Serbs look like pacifists, but since they have most "progressive" politicians in their bag any talk of intervention isn't even on a table. Same can be said about any other regime that abuses human rights on a grand scale, but gets a pass from Western elites due to financial and diplomatic ties.

[NorseThing]

Well, perhaps we are at the beginning of Iran-Contra 2.0

Elliott Abrams, a controversial neoconservative figure who was entangled in the Iran-Contra affair, has been named as a Trump administration special envoy overseeing policy toward Venezuela, which has been rocked by a leadership crisis.

Abrams’ appointment, announced Friday by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, is something of a surprise — President Donald Trump nixed his 2017 bid to be deputy secretary of State after learning that Abrams had criticized him.


Abrams will now be one of several special envoys Pompeo has brought on board to tackle thorny issues. He takes on his role at an unusually volatile time in U.S.-Venezuelan relations.

Earlier this week, Trump announced he no longer recognized the legitimacy of the Venezuelan regime of Nicolás Maduro and said the U.S. now considers opposition leader Juan Guaidó to be the country’s “interim president.” But Maduro refuses to leave power and has declared that Venezuela will cut off diplomatic ties with the United States.

“This crisis in Venezuela is deep and difficult and dangerous, and I can’t wait to get to work on it,” Abrams said in brief remarks to reporters.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...ezuela-1128562

[conon394]

(like Qaddafi and Saddam messing with petrodollar)

Will you find a better conspiracy theory - please. Wow the net effect of Libya and Iraq not pricing their oil in dollars zero. The net effect of no oil but US oil priced in dollars - umm us exports are cheaper a fraction of a few cents. Net effect of everyone selling in their own currency meh, all in Rubles or Yuan - enjoy the demand China or Czar.

[Vanoi]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-47014322

Germany, France, Spain, and the UK have given an ultimatum to Maduro's to hold elections or they will recognize Guaido.

[Yayattasa]

The fixation over pushing full blown democracy to every country... except it doesn't affect every country. Saudi Arabia, Turkey, China, and few others seem immune to it.

[conon394]

Germany, France, Spain, and the UK have given an ultimatum to Maduro's to hold elections or they will recognize Guaido.

Can't see it mattering while Maduro holds the military leadership. Although I guess if they were cynical enough they might try an Egypt play drop a hot potato and launch a coup against whomever gets elected - or get iron clad assurances they retain their positions.

[Vanoi]

The fixation over pushing full blown democracy to every country... except it doesn't affect every country. Saudi Arabia, Turkey, China, and few others seem immune to it.

No one is pushing democracy on Venezuela. It's population has had a democratic government. This is not Turkey, China, or Saudi Arabia.

[Daruwind]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ty-contractors

Looks like Vagner´s russian group is already in Venezuela protecting Maduro....so another russian intervention without flag?

Plus Bank of England seems to refuse the Maduro´s wish to return part of gold reserve...
(This article is actually pretty good as connection of freshly mined gold is leading into Turkey...Turkey which backed Maduro´s regime)

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...illion-of-gold

So question is, what will happen once Maduro runs out of money. No revolution/dictatorship is successful without army but without money, there might be no army behind Maduro soon. While Russia probably wants to oppose USA (as usual) and will probably provide bodies and weaponry, money are probably from China, which in return got a lot access under Maduro. This could be of course threatened by change of regime...

( https://www.reuters.com/article/us-v...-idUSKCN1LY2NN )

[Heathen Hammer]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-47014322

Germany, France, Spain, and the UK have given an ultimatum to Maduro's to hold elections or they will recognize Guaido.

Which means very little, given how this guy wasn't exactly elected either.

[Vanoi]

Which means very little, given how this guy wasn't exactly elected either.

You do know by definition Juan Guaido is an elected official? He's the head of the National Assembly which is Venezuela's democratically elected legislature. Not only that he claims the Venezuelan Constitution allows him to declare himself interim President.

At the end of the day if any sanctions are applied Maduro's is gone elected or not.

[95thrifleman]

Which means very little, given how this guy wasn't exactly elected either.

Syria 2, this time in spainish subtitles

[Heathen Hammer]

You do know by definition Juan Guaido is an elected official? He's the head of the National Assembly which is Venezuela's democratically elected legislature. Not only that he claims the Venezuelan Constitution allows him to declare himself interim President.

At the end of the day if any sanctions are applied Maduro's is gone elected or not.

That doesn't automatically make him the president. This sounds more like old colonial mentality where Western powers get to "recognize" which regimes they like or not. At the end of the day it is up for Venezuelans to decide, not Americans or Europeans.

Syria 2, this time in spainish subtitles

In fact, I recall US, UK and a bunch of other Western powers "recognizing" some clown as "real president of Syria," we all know how that one ended.

[Vanoi]

That doesn't automatically make him the president. This sounds more like old colonial mentality where Western powers get to "recognize" which regimes they like or not.

Colonial mentality? It's hilarious you saying that considering how many Latin American nation's themselves now recognize Juan Guaido as President. You keep trying to play this off as Western meddling but this issue is backed by more than just Western nation's.

At the end of the day it is up for Venezuelans to decide, not Americans or Europeans.

Nor Russians or Chinese, or Cubans, or Turks.