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.
Semi-genuine question, had you heard of Venezuela before today?
Like, in your view, had the successive US leaders just decided to ignore Maduro (and Chávez before him) for the past 25 years out of… what? Not having noticed they had a ton of oil? Venezuela nationalized their oil in the 70s, pivoted to China in the 00s. They stole the election while Biden was still in office. Chávez changed the Constitution when Clinton was in office, FFS.
Apparently Trump’s key differentiating attribute now is efficiency, because it seems in your broad strokes, the-rest-is-noise worldview the Dems were just about to throw a sack over Maduro’s head, they had just been procrastinating about it for a decade or two.
This is, sincerely, a profoundly stupid conversation we’re having. They really do let people just say things on the Internet.
I should also add that there was an attempted coup in 2002. The opposition claimed that it had not collaborated with the US but…well I’ll let the historical record and obvious imperialistic incentives speak for themselves. It only lasted 47 hours.
This is a very unusual way to look at history. You have to look at geopolitical decisions based on where the pieces are on the board today, not 30 years ago. The US was a unipolar hegimon 30 years ago. That is not the case today. There was no need leverage their hard power this way at that time. But circumstances are different now.
Trump and his administration may have accelerated the transition to a multipolar world order but the rise of China alone meant it was coming regardless of US foreign policy action.
My argument is that this has been in the back pocket and, if/when the time came, it would have been executed regardless of who was president. Its a particularly easy one to execute since, as you’ve said, there are questions to the legitimacy of Maduro as leader so they can replay the go to narrative of being liberators.
Fair. My overall impression is you’re coming at this from an American viewpoint so there is a natural predisposition to want to tell yourself that choice, via elections, makes a difference. Coming from a non American, non Western perspective there really is very little if any consideration given towards who is in power from this vantage point. There’s an understanding that America will intervene for its within its national interests. The process may differ but the outcome is the same. Our goal is generally to avoid being in the crosshairs of empire, if at all possible (while also protecting our interests).
I respect your opinion even though I find it a bit narrow in focus and perspective (as I’m sure you have similar criticisms of mine). In any case thanks for the discourse.
For the record, I’m not American and I live in a country that has non-democratic regimes well within living memory.
You don’t come across to me as particularly savvy, or as some form of a realist compared to the cushy liberal democracy children. You come across as deeply confusing cynicism with political insight for online brownie points.
Semi-genuine question, had you heard of Venezuela before today?
Like, in your view, had the successive US leaders just decided to ignore Maduro (and Chávez before him) for the past 25 years out of… what? Not having noticed they had a ton of oil? Venezuela nationalized their oil in the 70s, pivoted to China in the 00s. They stole the election while Biden was still in office. Chávez changed the Constitution when Clinton was in office, FFS.
Apparently Trump’s key differentiating attribute now is efficiency, because it seems in your broad strokes, the-rest-is-noise worldview the Dems were just about to throw a sack over Maduro’s head, they had just been procrastinating about it for a decade or two.
This is, sincerely, a profoundly stupid conversation we’re having. They really do let people just say things on the Internet.
I should also add that there was an attempted coup in 2002. The opposition claimed that it had not collaborated with the US but…well I’ll let the historical record and obvious imperialistic incentives speak for themselves. It only lasted 47 hours.
This is a very unusual way to look at history. You have to look at geopolitical decisions based on where the pieces are on the board today, not 30 years ago. The US was a unipolar hegimon 30 years ago. That is not the case today. There was no need leverage their hard power this way at that time. But circumstances are different now.
Trump and his administration may have accelerated the transition to a multipolar world order but the rise of China alone meant it was coming regardless of US foreign policy action.
My argument is that this has been in the back pocket and, if/when the time came, it would have been executed regardless of who was president. Its a particularly easy one to execute since, as you’ve said, there are questions to the legitimacy of Maduro as leader so they can replay the go to narrative of being liberators.
I guess it’s a lot easier to “look at history” a certain way if you make up the history.
I have too much to do today to deliberate the specifics of your historical fan fiction, man. You do you.
Fair. My overall impression is you’re coming at this from an American viewpoint so there is a natural predisposition to want to tell yourself that choice, via elections, makes a difference. Coming from a non American, non Western perspective there really is very little if any consideration given towards who is in power from this vantage point. There’s an understanding that America will intervene for its within its national interests. The process may differ but the outcome is the same. Our goal is generally to avoid being in the crosshairs of empire, if at all possible (while also protecting our interests).
I respect your opinion even though I find it a bit narrow in focus and perspective (as I’m sure you have similar criticisms of mine). In any case thanks for the discourse.
For the record, I’m not American and I live in a country that has non-democratic regimes well within living memory.
You don’t come across to me as particularly savvy, or as some form of a realist compared to the cushy liberal democracy children. You come across as deeply confusing cynicism with political insight for online brownie points.
Do with that assessment what you will.
I dont see either of us as uniquely savvy or insightful so at least we have that in common haha. Have a good one bud.