|
Helsing posted:
The invasion isn't the hard part--even in Iraq that was the easy part. The hard part is leaving behind something better than was there to begin with, and I think that's where political culture plays a bigger role than geography (though Caracas being on the coast is obviously favorable to the US). Iraq didn't have any institutions left after Saddam fell, because he was the only institution that was allowed to exist in Iraq during his reign. Can you imagine an "acting president" running around leading protests in pre-war Iraq like Guiado is doing right now as I type this in Venezuela? Colectivos firing into crowds or not, the stakes are just totally different, and it's because Venezuela was until recently a democracy with political freedoms, and I think that makes it easier for society to reconstitute itself once Maduro is gone than Iraq could after Saddam's defeat. I don't think Venezuela is a country as disposed to collapse into chaos, but I do think an invasion is unwise because it does increase the risk of destroying any perception of legitimacy the opposition has and seeing a speedier return of regime elements to power in the future and/or contributing to more unrest by regime holdouts in the near future. Also because Trump doesn't give a poo poo about the Venezuelan people, so I trust the ability of the US to provide a positive outcome even less than usual. Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 18:37 on May 1, 2019 |
#
?
May 1, 2019 18:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 21:32 |
|
|
It has been said before but I wouldn't worry too much about any invasion until at least a carrier group starts hanging out. Also, I'm not sure entirely sure that Trump could get enough of his own party behind him in order to conduct an invasion. He'd run a real risk of having congress finally reign in executive war powers.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 18:45
|
|
|
Coming in here and dropping “a US invasion would be quick and easy” is a such a transparent troll how can you guys fall for this so hard?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 18:47
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:How long will it take to capture Caracas? 2 days This is a cute fantasy, but the reality is that the US military (which for the past two decades has been doctrinally oriented for desert and urban warfare operations) would be facing a dedicated insurgency where: - The base has a relatively professional military as its primary core. - That is fighting on its home ground. - With relatively recent Russian tech. - And active Russian materiel support. - With a martyr from when Maduro inevitably gets killed. - And against an ethnocentric invasion from foreign occupiers. - While surrounded by sympathetic militias that so happen to be some of the most experienced jungle/mountain guerrillas in the world. If we consider the Iraq War as the geopolitical equivalent to a painful black eye, then this would be a hemorrhaging laceration. Conspiratiorist fucked around with this message at 18:53 on May 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 18:50
|
|
|
Giggle Goose posted:Also, I'm not sure entirely sure that Trump could get enough of his own party behind him in order to conduct an invasion. He'd run a real risk of having congress finally reign in executive war powers. Any AUMF against Venezuela would pass overwhelmingly even in the democratic House, and even if he went to war without one what the hell is congress going to do, impeach him?  Hes on record multiple times committing obstruction of justice and we can't even get Pelosi to do anything more than a 
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 18:51
|
|
|
The Al Jazeera article is a repackaging of this Reuters article, which is a bit more clear about it. And could we please not clancychat.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 18:55
|
|
|
Comrayn posted:Coming in here and dropping “a US invasion would be quick and easy” is a such a transparent troll how can you guys fall for this so hard? I get too stressed out arguing with people to troll and then follow up with effort, so you're wrong. Conspiratiorist posted:This is a cute fantasy, but the reality is that the US military (which for the past two decades has been doctrinally oriented for desert and urban warfare operations) would be facing a dedicated insurgency where: This is bonkers, and basically what I was pushing back against when I said invasion would be easy, even if ill advised. Just because the Venezuelan military didn't all throw down their guns yesterday in the failed coup attempt doesn't mean they're willing to die for Maduro when the US shows up. It's not even clear if Maduro would stick around. Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 18:58 on May 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 18:56
|
|
|
Giggle Goose posted:Also, I'm not sure entirely sure that Trump could get enough of his own party behind him in order to conduct an invasion. He'd run a real risk of having congress finally reign in executive war powers. https://i.imgur.com/GOHI6gl.mp4 The capitalist parties of the US would absolutely love another opportunity to stand together behind strong daddy emperor Trump.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 18:56
|
|
|
Comrayn posted:Coming in here and dropping "a US invasion would be quick and easy" is a such a transparent troll how can you guys fall for this so hard? Amend that prior troll hot take too: 'The US coming in and smashing and killing everything valuable supporting Maduro and the infrastructure that would benefit both him and whichever future government of the country would be quick and easy.' The US is very good at breaking things, and Venezuela can do nothing to meaningfully oppose that if it happens. That is a precursor to the discussion of if that would be good (it wouldn't be), if the US should deploy there and occupy like Iraq and Afghanistan (Lol absolutely not), and the limitless of issues of running a political entity where half the population views their backers as an imperialist power sucking their country dry. Despite Trump being who he is I don't suspect any real military action will happen. Maybe a strike like the Damascus one to appear tough and get some footage of buildings blowing up that will just rile people up.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 18:58
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The trolley problem is about the tension between rule moralism and consequentialism, not specific acts. I think it is telling that you retreat to abstraction here. No matter how you want to frame it – literally, figuratively, abstractly, morally, philosophically, tactically – it would be better for the Cuban people if the US just stopped doing poo poo. I don't think you honestly disagree with that statement, hence the abstract evasion.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 19:01
|
|
|
It's not a retreat, it's literally what the trolley problem is about. Positioning yourself as an anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist (but only, exclusively, with regard to the US, then presenting this in terms of a rejection of the fundamental concept of sovereign recognition, requires such an abstraction to try to come to grips with so ideologically inconsistent a position.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 19:10
|
|
|
Trump's ability to invade Venezuela would not in any meaningful sense end up constrained by the Republican party, which has abetted his actions with reliable disintegration of constitutional and legislative norms to match. What will keep Venezuela untouched by occupation is unmatched dysfunction in the executive. Bolton wants this so hard he can taste it, but so far has no rational and plausible way forward.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 19:12
|
|
|
Kavros posted:Trump's ability to invade Venezuela would not in any meaningful sense end up constrained by the Republican party, which has abetted his actions with reliable disintegration of constitutional and legislative norms to match. Given the fact that they're apparently staffing up from Erik Prince's band of inept mercenaries, I think there is at least one plausible way forward: provoke a response from Maduro, and then use that as a pretext for invasion. We'll see if Bolton takes that route or not, but it's pretty short-sighted to discount the possibility.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 19:21
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:The invasion isn't the hard part--even in Iraq that was the easy part. The hard part is leaving behind something better than was there to begin with, and I think that's where political culture plays a bigger role than geography (though Caracas being on the coast is obviously favorable to the US). Iraq didn't have any institutions left after Saddam fell, because he was the only institution that was allowed to exist in Iraq during his reign. Can you imagine an "acting president" running around leading protests in pre-war Iraq like Guiado is doing right now as I type this in Venezuela? Colectivos firing into crowds or not, the stakes are just totally different, and it's because Venezuela was until recently a democracy with political freedoms, and I think that makes it easier for society to reconstitute itself once Maduro is gone than Iraq could after Saddam's defeat. Ah yes geography, that famously irrelevant factor in planning military operations. I can tell you're really thinking this through.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 19:22
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:It's not a retreat, it's literally what the trolley problem is about. Positioning yourself as an anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist (but only, exclusively, with regard to the US, then presenting this in terms of a rejection of the fundamental concept of sovereign recognition, requires such an abstraction to try to come to grips with so ideologically inconsistent a position. Again, I don't think you're seriously interested in defending Donald Trump's threats against the Cuban people over the situation in Venezuela, but if that's where your philosophical position takes you, then yikes.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 19:24
|
|
|
This seems easier said than done. https://twitter.com/charliearchy/status/1123650739568463872 Their solution, as I understand it: quote:MS says that "in this way, a coup controlled by the exploiting class, we will not find a favorable outcome to the unbearable economic and social situation that we suffer." That is why they call on the working class and the popular sectors to "not fall into this deception and not lend themselves to serving as 'cannon fodder', without meaning giving up the fight!". For this, they propose to work to "reconstruct our own forces in the social and political areas, independently, without submitting ourselves to the bureaucracy or the traditional bourgeoisie". William Bear fucked around with this message at 19:37 on May 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 19:30
|
|
|
I mean they’re correct in that both Maduro and Guaido are bad and they need a real 3rd option
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 19:34
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:This is bonkers, and basically what I was pushing back against when I said invasion would be easy, even if ill advised. Just because the Venezuelan military didn't all throw down their guns yesterday in the failed coup attempt doesn't mean they're willing to die for Maduro when the US shows up. It's not even clear if Maduro would stick around. Forget Maduro - your entire argument rests on the assumption that people won't be willing to fight and die for their country against a foreign invader. Please think long and hard about this, and when it's ever been true in instances of US military adventurism over the past 70 years.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 19:42
|
|
|
You've lost track of your own train of thought at this point- I've never even brought up Cuba in this conversation, you've only just added it to the mix. What you have done is confuse a basic literacy of the underpinnings of international law as an embrace of...well, it seems to shift and expand or contract from post to post. Again: The United States, through a wide range of forms of activity, has influence outside its own borders. These effects are ethically weighted, whether they occur through action or inaction (this would be the trolley problem part). One example of this is the necessity of recognizing and designating sovereign entities (this would be the foundations of international law part). Another is the agreements associated with Ctigo. Another is immigration policy. Another is AML. Another is any form of interaction with any other proximate country, which is itself influenced and influencer. Setting aside your myopic and willful ignorance of countries that are not the US, these other factors still exist - saying "the US should not involve itself in any way in Venezuelan politics" is nonsensical because the US, like any other country on the planet, cannot "not involve itself in any way". It's literally not possible. Your endless, willful refusal to engage with the multiple examples that we've provided of why isn't some sort of bold stand. Principled ignorance is not a substitute for reading comprehension. William Bear posted:This seems easier said than done. I can't tell if this group has ever had any sort of support base or political representation at all. Maybe venegoons can tell us if they're a meaningful actor. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 19:49 on May 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 19:47
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:I can't tell if this group has ever had any sort of support base or political representation at all. Maybe venegoons can tell us if they're a meaningful actor. They don't have any representation in the legislature. I only quoted them because, as far as I can tell, they're the most prominent group that criticizes Maduro from the left.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:02
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:I can't tell if this group has ever had any sort of support base or political representation at all. Maybe venegoons can tell us if they're a meaningful actor. Yeah, Marea Socialista is a legit party. If I recall correctly they used to be part of the Gran Polo Patriotico (the PSUV-led faction at the National Assembly), but split a few years ago after the MS leader, Nicmer Evans, started to criticize Maduro. I think he left the party back in 2017. I don't know too much about MS as a party, but I have followed Evans' work over the last few years and he seems really reasonable. I don't know if Evans left the party because it was becoming unreasonable, though, so I'd have to read more about what's been going on with it to say more.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:05
|
|
|
Everyone from cspam likes to frame anything their arguing against as simplistic and malign because they struggle to retain multiple points of inquiry or apply any kind of nuance to their analysis. It's interesting that they loathe neoliberal and neoconservative politicians so much considering they utilize approximately the same depth of analysis in arriving at their preselected conclusions for any given discussion. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:06
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:The invasion isn't the hard part--even in Iraq that was the easy part. The hard part is leaving behind something better than was there to begin with, and I think that's where political culture plays a bigger role than geography (though Caracas being on the coast is obviously favorable to the US). Iraq didn't have any institutions left after Saddam fell, because he was the only institution that was allowed to exist in Iraq during his reign. I like how people try to spin their complete lack of knowledge on a subject into a reflection of reality. Iraq had a ton of non-Saddam government structures it's just that the Occupation spent all of it's time destroying them due to a combination of psychotic free-market ideology and trying to whore off the countries assets for personal profit. They never actually tried to leave behind "something better" you ninny.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:07
|
|
|
For the US to "not be involved" with Venezuela would require implementing something akin to the Arab League boycott of Israel. No trade, no diplomatic or economic relations, no travel, etc. Since I don't think this is what Kobayashi means by the US not getting "involved" I assume they mean "take no steps against unfettered trade and finance" except this would violate quite a bit of domestic US and international law on corruption, money laundering, etc. Hence the early sanctions focused on named individuals deeply involved in theft and AML. So unless Kobayashi approves of the billions of stolen money by PSUV leaders being freely laundered in the US and used to buy mansions in Miami... there was the bodyguard guy, and the two nephews dealing drugs, etc.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:08
|
|
|
William Bear posted:They don't have any representation in the legislature. I only quoted them because, as far as I can tell, they're the most prominent group that criticizes Maduro from the left. I forgot to mention this part, it's why I needed to also hear from Chuck Boone- they were denied election certification, so I couldn't rely on that part. Thank you both!
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:14
|
|
|
Kawasaki Nun posted:Everyone from cspam likes to frame anything their arguing against as simplistic and malign because they struggle to retain multiple points of inquiry or apply any kind of nuance to their analysis. Nah, you just need to twist yourself into very complicated knots in order to justify your support for a murderous neoliberal empire
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:21
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Kobayashi you're now objecting to the foundational underpinnings of all international law, because they exist. I need you to think about why and how you've come to this. Can you name one instance post WW2 where the USA wanted to do X but the international community said "no you can't do X" and then the USA did not go ahead with X anyway? Even if you can (I honestly can't), based on the preponderance of instances it seems like the USA and its allies flout international law when it suits them. Helsing posted:Blackwater founder's plan for mercenaries in Venezuela: Report Also yeah. Also Erik Prince is a murderous lunatic who got in hot water for being a murderous lunatic who employs murderous lunatics to do war crimes in the Middle East  US is sending their best! Moridin920 fucked around with this message at 20:30 on May 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:24
|
|
|
Zidrooner posted:Nah, you just need to twist yourself into very complicated knots in order to justify your support for a murderous neoliberal empire Right I forgot that you also just make up positions wholesale. Could you point to where I made a post in support of American intervention or neoliberal policies? I know you'll probably just slink off instead of replying to this, as is your habit, but seriously your ability to discuss this topic seems completely hamstring by your desperate need to be recognized as morally superior.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:30
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:You've lost track of your own train of thought at this point- I've never even brought up Cuba in this conversation, you've only just added it to the mix. What you have done is confuse a basic literacy of the underpinnings of international law as an embrace of...well, it seems to shift and expand or contract from post to post. nobody is calling for the united states to become a hermit kingdom, that is just a strawman you created. instead, they just want an end to us sanctions on venezuela, and an end to the constant threats of violence (and suspected support of armed coups) against venezuela. basically, people just want the us to treat venezuela the same way that the us treats canada. you have argued at great length on these forums against russian influence in us politics, surely you can understand why people wouldn't want a far greater degree of us interference in venezuelan politics? the absurd shambles that is going on at the venezuelan embassy in dc right now, and the incredibly blatent theft of venezuelan assets held abroad are indications that the us isn't motivated by following international law. the policies of the us state department for a very long time have been about realpolitik, not ethics, and thinking of international politics as some sort of carefully optimized ethics problem obscures the real motivations of state actors. trying to fit an ethical framework around imperialism doesn't make it more humane, it just warps the ethical framework into something unrecognizable.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:32
|
|
|
Also any invasion of Venezuela would involve fighting against a nightmare jungle guerrilla insurgency and btw the US didn't do so great helping to fight FARC (iirc).
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:36
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Also any invasion of Venezuela would involve fighting against a nightmare jungle guerrilla insurgency and btw the US didn't do so great helping to fight FARC (iirc). If you think there is any question of America's capability to wage war in South America you need to educate yourself because it is absolutely not a question of capability. Maybe don't trust your memory or instincts.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:40
|
|
|
William Bear posted:This seems easier said than done. It's almost like the us proposed alternative to Maduro of years of civil war and destruction is something that should be rejected.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:41
|
|
|
Kawasaki Nun posted:If you think there is any question of America's capability to wage war in South America you need to educate yourself because it is absolutely not a question of capability. Yeah I mean I'm sure we can turn it into a hellzone bloodbath full of bombs and mines. We also have nuclear weapons, after all. To what end though? If you do scorched earth on Caracas then the proposition of "the USA is coming to free you from tyranny and spread democracy" loses what little plausibility it has to begin with. I hate these military scenarios that have no broader context in mind. Yeah our guns are bigger and more numerous. I thought the point was to install the elected leader into power, not to turn the nation into a graveyard. Moridin920 fucked around with this message at 20:45 on May 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:43
|
|
|
Kawasaki Nun posted:If you think there is any question of America's capability to wage war in South America you need to educate yourself because it is absolutely not a question of capability. America could easily inflict more misery on Venezuela or pay and arm mercenaries to destabilize the government but lol if you really think the US military could successfully pull of a long term invasion and occupation of the country.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:44
|
|
|
Kawasaki Nun posted:If you think there is any question of America's capability to wage war in South America you need to educate yourself because it is absolutely not a question of capability. You keep claiming you're not an imperialist but then you make broad claims about how badass the US military is with no evidence.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:45
|
|
|
GoluboiOgon posted:nobody is calling for the united states to become a hermit kingdom, that is just a strawman you created. instead, they just want an end to us sanctions on venezuela, and an end to the constant threats of violence (and suspected support of armed coups) against venezuela. basically, people just want the us to treat venezuela the same way that the us treats canada. you have argued at great length on these forums against russian influence in us politics, surely you can understand why people wouldn't want a far greater degree of us interference in venezuelan politics? In other words, the U.S. should drop the sanctions, take absolutely no further action in Venezuela and just let the chips fall where they may, hoping that the situation basically works itself out. Somehow. I'm all for it, but the Venezuelan people on the ground may see things a bit differently. I'm not hearing a lot of what they really want, aside from the blindingly obvious (no more food shortages, clean running water, 24/7 electricity, etc.).
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:45
|
|
|
Helsing posted:America could easily inflict more misery on Venezuela or pay and arm mercenaries to destabilize the government but lol if you really think the US military could successfully pull of a long term invasion and occupation of the country. I never said anything about a long term occupation, but with potentially friendly governments in the region I don't think an occupation would look very similar to how Iraq and Afghanistan have and do. kidkissinger posted:You keep claiming you're not an imperialist but then you make broad claims about how badass the US military is with no evidence. I dont think of the US military as badass but considering we have been waiting war on the other end of the planet for almost 2 decades with little to no material impact on living standards within the CONUS I think our ability to invade Venezuela can be taken as assumed. If you don't think this is the case I'd be happy to discuss why you feel that way with you Kawasaki Nun fucked around with this message at 20:51 on May 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:46
|
|
|
Balliver Shagnasty posted:In other words, the U.S. should drop the sanctions, take absolutely no further action in Venezuela and just let the chips fall where they may, hoping that the situation basically works itself out. Somehow. The Venezuelan people can probably manage the situation without the US instigating a coup on behalf of some random right wing politician.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:46
|
|
|
Balliver Shagnasty posted:In other words, the U.S. should drop the sanctions, take absolutely no further action in Venezuela and just let the chips fall where they may, hoping that the situation basically works itself out. Somehow. The idea that there are two choices here, either Trump-Bolton-Pompeo-Abrams or forever wash our hands of the situation and do nothing ever again is erroneous. The idea that since we don't know what the people in VZ want we should go along with Trump & co. is also erroneous. Like - if we don't know what the Venezuelans want then maybe we should gather more data before putting military action on the table. Moridin920 fucked around with this message at 20:49 on May 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 21:32 |
|
|
Kawasaki Nun posted:I never said anything about a long term occupation, but with potentially friendly governments in the region I don't think an occupation would look very similar to how Iraq and Afghanistan have and do. You know that we had US-friendly governments immediately adjacent to both of those countries right?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 20:47
|
|