WHAT WOULD DONALD Trump have to do for the U.S. media to frame what he is doing in Venezuela as an act of war?
This isn’t a rhetorical question. It’s an actual inquiry, the pursuit of which can reveal a lot about how U.S. media’s default posture is state subservience and stenography. In the past few months, President Trump has committed several clear acts of war against Venezuela, including: murdering — in cold blood — scores of its citizens, hijacking its ships, stealing its resources, issuing a naval blockade, and attacking its ports. Then in a stunning escalation on early Saturday morning, the administration invaded Venezuela’s sovereign territory, bombing several buildings, killing at least 40 more of its citizens, kidnapping Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife from their bed, and announcing they will, henceforth, “run” the country.
This episode seems to indicate that the president can do almost anything in the context of foreign policy, and the media will still overwhelmingly adopt language that is flattering and sanitizing to the administration when describing what has unfolded. This dynamic reached a new low Saturday morning, when the U.S. media rushed to frame the administration’s unprovoked attack as, at worst, a “ratcheted up” (CBS News) “pressure campaign” (Wall Street Journal) and, as was more often the case, some type of limited narcotics police “operation” (CNN).
First, the MSM always props up the MIC. If this is surprising to you now, maybe you should revisit history. Second, the capture of Maduro was also Biden’s policy. Did you forget already?
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4g9ezyw0keo
Funny… I don’t recall Biden invading Venezuela, or drumming up lies about drugs then stealing their oil.
Proud Zionist Biden upped the bounty leading to Maduro’s arrest, claiming he was an illegitimate leader in favor of the US-backed Zionist puppet. Trump had his goons arrest Maduro. If you don’t like what Trump is doing then don’t vote for politicians that support genocide & regime change.
Colombia and Brazil both declared Maduro’s election as illegitimate. They have also been in opposition of the capture of Maduro by the USA.
Source?
google.com
This may come as a surprise to you, but you can both condemn Trump’s actions AND recognize that Maduro was an illegitimate leader that stole an election according to every third-party audit. And not just like “well it was close, who’s to say who really won?” but like the votes went 2-1 to his opponent. He lost BAD, but decided to lie, cling to power and attempt to imprison his opponent. Maduro is a vicious dictator and calling him an illegitimate leader is not just a claim, it’s a fact.
And yes, it’s also true that Trump’s actions were an illegal act of war. Full stop. No questions at all there. But the people trying to condemn this by making Maduro out to be some innocent saint are either trolls ignoring his corruption, or people so ignorant as to the situation that they should maybe just shut the fuck up until they spend more than 2 minutes learning about it.
Maduro is not an illegitimate leader. The Bolivarian revolution was widely supported among the people of Venezuela and freed millions from poverty, until USA sanctions demolished their economy. The express purpose of USA sanctioning, according to the US government is to, and I quote, “bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government”. USA+EU sanctions additionally murder half a million innocents per year according to recent serious sociologic and medical studies.
By defending regime change under extreme economic sanctioning, you’re approving the murders of 38 million people over the past 50 years of economic sanctions, and directly supporting the CIA strategy of “starve them until they change their minds”.
A) They didn’t up the bounty for his arrest. They upped the reward for legitimate information that could be used to support having him arrested. Since Biden never gave that bounty to anyone and didn’t arrest him or request he be arrested, then that should trigger in your thinking process that there is a huge fucking difference in policy between “We are investigating whether it is legally valid to pursue narco-terrorism charges against a world leader who we think did not win a legitimate election” and “We are invading a nation to capture a person to bring to trial without showing any evidence.”
B) That link was about getting information leading to his legal arrest through international cooperation in a court system, not about unilaterally deciding to invade a country and kill a bunch of people to extract a high value target.
A) First, I don’t know if you can be even more clueless to understand what “information leading to the arrest and/or conviction of Maduro” refers to. Do you think that just means a bounty that doesn’t get enforced? It literally is to there to provide information to assist the US in arresting Maduro.
B) Ah yeah, I forgot they were going to send in the international police to arrest him despite not having an arrest warrant by the ICC. I do know of one person that had an arrest warrant by the ICC though that Biden was very friendly with, sending money & weapons to help murder children while his admin vetoed bills to stop the genocide.
There was ever so much whining about Obama using drone strikes