America/Venezuela hostilities intensify

[chew-ie]

The land of the freeimperialists

[fiksal]

The land of the freeimperialists

Now that I am getting used to live abroad, I've been pondering myself what is America a land of. Something to explore, but possibly not for this thread.

[Skism]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goS2QKZhivQ

(mercenaries 2 world in flames)

Old Ps2 game where the United States Invades Venezuela ad has a kind of cold war with China

[clakclak]

I think one of the funniest but also bleakest things to come out of this is, that while Trump didn't inform congress about the entire operation, he said, when asked if he tipped off oil companies, that he spoke with them "before and after" the operation, meaning oil companies knew more than Congress, which I guess makes sense for a country like America.

[fiksal]

There are two non responses that bother me
- US Congress, except for Democrats is silent on this. Starting to remind me the Russian Parliament
- Europe. Is Europe really that afraid? What do you need not to be?

[clakclak]

There are two non responses that bother me
- US Congress, except for Democrats is silent on this. Starting to remind me the Russian Parliament
- Europe. Is Europe really that afraid? What do you need not to be?

I don't think it is like Europe is scared, more like Europe doesn't particularly care that much. Some in Europe may even hope this will lead to a new source of resources ot under Chinese or middle eastern control.

To give the shortest overview over the reactions from Germany.

CDU (ruling party 1): Situation is "complex"(we don't really give a shit)

Left: Not happy

Greens: Not happy

AfD: Not yet truly decided, I assume the russian telegram with the talking points failed to arrive in time

SPD (government party 2): Let's be honest nobody cares what the SPD says either way, but they did voice some harsh criticism of Trump

[Chips]

There are two non responses that bother me
- US Congress, except for Democrats is silent on this. Starting to remind me the Russian Parliament
- Europe. Is Europe really that afraid? What do you need not to be?

I guess the question is, what response(s) are you wanting to see? What do you think should happen?

E.g. The UK response may appear to have been muted, and may seem a bit wishy-washy...

Kier Starmer on a Sunday politics program in the UK

"I want to get all the material facts together, and we simply haven't got the full picture at the moment," Sir Keir told the BBC. "It's fast moving, and we need to piece that together.
I can be really clear with you that there was no UK involvement in this operation. I then need to speak to President Trump, I need to speak to our allies, but I don't shy away from this.
I've been a lifelong advocate of international law and the importance of compliance with international law.
But I want to ensure that I've got all the facts at my disposal, and we haven't got that at the moment. And we need to get that before we come to a decision about the consequences in relation to the actions that have been taken."

as well as:

"regarded Maduro as an illegitimate president and we shed no tears about the end of his regime".

So in my eyes it's less about twitter-ready reaction hyperbole and more about "getting it correct", which is surely the more competent/adult/correct way to approach it?

[fiksal]

I don't think it is like Europe is scared, more like Europe doesn't particularly care that much

Hm, yeah I can understand that. It seems we will re visit what Europe cares about and when it should've on the topic of Greenland.

I guess the question is, what response(s) are you wanting to see? What do you think should happen?
...

So in my eyes it's less about twitter-ready reaction hyperbole and more about "getting it correct", which is surely the more competent/adult/correct way to approach it?

Is it legal... or perhaps acceptable to how Europe functions for one country to forcefully remove the other government and then install its own regime?

I now I have already hit so many references to many events in last few years.

But still, is it?

We frown at Putin, but is this okay or not?

Putin for example has a warrant now. Trump doesn't. Is that because he didn't commit enough crimes yet?

Am I being silly to ask this because the topic is about US?

[Chips]

Is it legal... or perhaps acceptable to how Europe functions for one country to forcefully remove the other government and then install its own regime?

Ack, forum issues mean I lost a post.

Delcy Rodríguez is the current acting president of Venezuela; she was appointed Vice President by Maduro in 2018. Therefore Maduro may be snatched, but the Government of Venezuela continues on. Not yet a regime change, though Trumpler has already hinted at more if they aren't willing to be coerced into being a puppet. So have to wait and see.

As for legal/acceptable actions for Europe? The Guardian has questioned a few experts (who knows if they tried to find any for a different view )

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/ ... ump-maduro

The experts the Guardian spoke to agreed that the US is likely to have violated the terms of the UN charter, which was signed in October 1945 and designed to prevent another conflict on the scale of the second world war. A central provision of this agreement – known as article 2(4) – rules that states must refrain from using military force against other countries and must respect their sovereignty

The US is likely to claim a defence to justify it's actions though - and it's whether that stands up that needs examining. Previously they've used Article 51 for the initial invasion of Afghanistan as there was no UN Security Council resolution authorising the use of force.

However, we've plenty of examples of no international legal justification directly - including Iraq (the second time), NATO intervention over Serbia/Kosovo and then beyond - many smaller instances, such as actions in Syria, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq again (assassination of Soleimani). No UN Security council resolutions to justify use of force - but many "okay" under UN Charter 51 and/or US Constitution. Nothing happened.

e.g. Syria -- The UK justified its actions as legal without resolutions based on meeting criteria that made it an exceptional basis for intervention; extreme humanitarian distress, no alternative, only necessary amount of force to be used. Justifications for fighting ISIS in other nations were based around collective defence of Iraq or own nations against Terrorism. This could be the justification by the US with Maduro?

That's why I personally feel its worth European leaders finding out and collectively agreeing upon a united line. Undoubtedly the UN Security Council isn't really fit for purpose when the likes of the US, Russia and China can veto anything (The UK and France can too, but the UK especially is likely to follow the US vote, or abstain - so a bit redundant)

I don't think there's anything silly discussing anything that concerns people. Forming opinions can change based on what's found/read (hence why sources are good, but I cba to find the half dozen again now - most of the above is easily Google-able), or may convince others otherwise - and that goes all ways, as we may be unaware of just not considering aspects others can point out.

Broadly I'd agree with the "I hope there's some form of criticism, otherwise the US will be emboldened" - but at the same time, does the US care? Will anything come of it? Will it only cause potential issues for Europe and does Europe at that point want to face that tradeoff over Maduro?

Of course by the time they've also done Colombia, Cuba, Iran and are massing a fleet off of Greenland...

[clakclak]

I don't think it is like Europe is scared, more like Europe doesn't particularly care that much

Hm, yeah I can understand that. It seems we will re visit what Europe cares about and when it should've on the topic of Greenland.

[...]

Going by what Miller and Co. are saying now we are going to find out sooner rather than later.

To catch everyone up to date:

Americas' position is: Might makes right and thus America has the right to take Greenland.

The position of other NATO members is different.

[fiksal]

Miller is the real MAGA.

He is the closest as it gets to a fascist in the US government. Not sure if he draws from American neo nazi ideas, but not sure if that distinction matters.

[chew-ie]

Miller is the real MAGA.

He is the closest as it gets to a fascist in the US government. Not sure if he draws from American neo nazi ideas, but not sure if that distinction matters.

As the saying goes... he quacks like a duck.

One has to be really blind not to recognize ICE as Gestapo 2.0 (with fancy facemasks to encourage them even more to behave sadistic - I wonder why they don't get some fancy 3D printed black helmets with glowing red eyes to underline their viciousness even more) and all the other clear indicators the Trump regime playing the Nazi playbook.

I really feel bad for all those guys'n gals in the US army who try to serve their country. They won't do that at all in what is coming next and there will be some pretty hard choices to be made by them - which not all of them might be able to make because they are locked into their jobs due to financial dependencies. If this goes any further and no one stops the Trump administration, US troopers will be the new Wehrmacht and they will do the exactly same atrocities like ICE is doing now.

[clakclak]

Miller is the real MAGA.

He is the closest as it gets to a fascist in the US government. Not sure if he draws from American neo nazi ideas, but not sure if that distinction matters.

Miller is often compared to Goebbels, but I think we are in luck. Goebbels was one of the worst people in history, but he also was downright dangerous as he had a natural feeling for how to manipulate people. Miller doesn't have a single original idea in his head. He is an agitator, sure, but he seems pretty shallow. He is mutch more of an edgy school kid who enjoys the shocked expression on people's faces whenever he says something heartless. Watch his speeches from high-school and compare them with today, there isn't any change, no progress at all.

Is Miller a fascist? Yes. Going by what he says, he absolutely crosses that line. But he isn't someone capable of adopting the ideology for the 21st century. That is also apparent as I don't think even many conservatives are big fans of his. He seems like a broken recorder a product from a bygone era, whos main purpose is to make the other high ranking politicians seem sane by comparison. If you compare him to, for example, a Steve Bannon who has similar despicable views the difference not in what they say, but how they see themselves and the world is rapidly apparent. Bannon is a crusader driven to enact change, he too has a big ego, all of them do, but to him it is about more than just himself. The same can't be said about Miller.