|
The president does still control policy, and has been...mercurial about many of the US's standard foreign policy positions. It's hard to say how much the bureaucracy has been doing on its own of its own initiative underneath his administration. Some domestic bureaucratic institutions have even been directly sabotaged by the administration without the politicians necessarily having to restaff it or publicly change its purpose. One way or another, the administration controls what the rest of the executive branch does. And largely, the administration's foreign policy is driven by domestic forces. Conservatives started talking about Venezuela because they were desperate for ways to revive the red scare with so many politicians willing to consider socialized healthcare, but the fact that the current administration has flipped on the many of the US's formerly considered rivals meant that there was an opening, and a government that regularly talks poo poo about the US got them all hot and bothered inside. Having foreign enemies is great for distracting from the deficiencies of your domestic policies, although Trump has also been fishing for some kind of visible diplomatic victory for some reason, so it's hard to say what he can be talked into. On an actual military front, I doubt congress would authorize any actual troop deployments, although certainly if there's a civil war, it wouldn't be surprising for the US to provide weapons, as the top arms exporter on the planet. So maybe the US government can be a positive force against Maduro's regime, even though they definitely don't have the best interests of the Venezuelan people in mind. The impurity of US motivations does not in any way mean that Maduro hasn't led his country to ruin and maintained power in a ludicrous parody of democracy.
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2019 20:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 17:39 |
|
|
imagine spending this much time and energy agitating for genocidal intervention
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2019 20:57
|
|
|
It is quite odd to see claims of "genocidal intervention" when a dictator is mass starving his own people for better part of decade. Perhaps I missed where there was some declaration that this was intended? I must also remind us all that before beginning of the year, Maduro's system was selling off massive amounts of Venezuela resources to US specifically, including US corporations receiving large amounts of ownership of oilfields and export facilities. Since people insist on pretending privatization is new or only of opposition. Only thing that has put that on hold is, the sanctions of the US blocking the US companies from being sold more.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2019 21:16
|
|
|
nepetaMisekiryoiki posted:It is quite odd to see claims of "genocidal intervention" when a dictator is mass starving his own people for better part of decade. Perhaps I missed where there was some declaration that this was intended? All while China and Russia gobble up what is left. The apologists never really have much to say about that part of it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2019 22:12
|
|
|
Never ending but always hilarious conflation of people who recognize the long history of US intervention and sanctions and the increased suffering they cause with "Maduro apologists," but hey it lets you deflect from ever addressing the actual effects! e: just do a find and replace and the pro sanctions side sounds identical to every person shouting about how terrible Saddam and the Taliban we're back in 2002.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 01:05
|
|
|
brugroffil posted:Never ending but always hilarious conflation of people who recognize the long history of US intervention and sanctions and the increased suffering they cause with "Maduro apologists," but hey it lets you deflect from ever addressing the actual effects! While calling everyone an "apologist" is certainly hyperbolic, it is no more so than the endless train of posts calling people like fnox phonies or traitors or implying anyone who isn't all about the Bolivarian revolution a fascist baby killer or whatever. Y'all don't get it both ways. I mean sweet jesus that one rear end in a top hat awhile back was trying to imply that one of this thread's longest running and most consistently engaged posters was somehow lying about his entire situation. It is really hard to remain objective in the face of that sort of madness. Edit: And as far as being "pro-sanction", I would hazard that everyone here who is "pro-sanction" is so because they see sanctions as quite possibly the best play with a bad hand when it comes to getting Maduro out and restoring Venezuelan democracy. Y'all who keep saying that the sanctions have to go right now, I have a question for you. Let's say that tomorrow Dipshit Donnie and his boys decide "ah gently caress it" and drop the sanctions and the EU and the multitude of other nations follow suit. What happens then? How do you get rid of Maduro at that point? I really am curious as to what your play book is, since so many of you claim that you want Maduro gone. Edit 2: Clarity Giggle Goose fucked around with this message at 01:22 on Aug 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 01:16
|
|
|
Cutting off food and medicine to a people is the best play, I say monstrously
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 01:24
|
|
|
I don't have a plan for getting rid of Maduro, but I do know that US sanctions are making things worse because they always do that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 01:27
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Cutting off food and medicine to a people is the best play, I say monstrously This is an example of the issue I have with the posters in this thread and why I label them apologists. Has it not been pointed out, over and over again, that the sanctions do not target food supplies? Why do you all continue to repeat this?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 01:33
|
|
|
brugroffil posted:
There were 4 million Afghanis in school in 2002, all boys. Today there are 8 million Afghanis in school and half of them are girls. The taliban was pretty terrible.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 01:53
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Cutting off food and medicine to a people is the best play, I say monstrously Why are you assuming food is being cut off. I posted several links to google reviews that show restaurants are still open.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 01:56
|
|
|
BigFactory posted:There were 4 million Afghanis in school in 2002, all boys. Today there are 8 million Afghanis in school and half of them are girls. The taliban was pretty terrible. You think Afghanistan is an example of a successful intervention?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 02:11
|
|
|
Giggle Goose posted:This is an example of the issue I have with the posters in this thread and why I label them apologists. Has it not been pointed out, over and over again, that the sanctions do not target food supplies? Why do you all continue to repeat this? People itt were defending this as a good idea https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/08/06/donald-trump-venezuela-embargo-imposed-nicolas-maduros-government/1929621001/
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 02:16
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:You think Afghanistan is an example of a successful intervention? No, I think the taliban were pretty terrible.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 02:21
|
|
|
BigFactory posted:There were 4 million Afghanis in school in 2002, all boys. Today there are 8 million Afghanis in school and half of them are girls. The taliban was pretty terrible. The point is that merely asserting that something is bad in a country is not in any way an argument in favor of either military intervention or sanctions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 02:33
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:The point is that merely asserting that something is bad in a country is not in any way an argument in favor of either military intervention or sanctions. And sometimes good things come out of lovely US global overreach, too, like educating Afghani girls.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 03:07
|
|
|
Giggle Goose posted:This is an example of the issue I have with the posters in this thread and why I label them apologists. Has it not been pointed out, over and over again, that the sanctions do not target food supplies? Why do you all continue to repeat this? You can repeat John Bolton's lie that "Targetted sanctions" don't have collateral damage but it's just that, a lie. BigFactory posted:And sometimes good things come out of lovely US global overreach, too, like educating Afghani girls. That was the Soviet Union.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 04:02
|
|
|
BigFactory posted:And sometimes good things come out of lovely US global overreach, too, like educating Afghani girls. The taliban were the result of US global overreach as well. They were created and trained by the Pakistanis, flush with cash and the infrastructure created with America and the Saudis for training jihadists against the USSR. The US has been allied with sunni extremism for a long time. In addition to weapons, funding and intelligence, they supplied the propaganda material for the taliban's ideology: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2002/03/23/from-us-the-abcs-of-jihad/d079075a-3ed3-4030-9a96-0d48f6355e54/?noredirect=on The ideology that keeps girls out of schools. mila kunis fucked around with this message at 06:37 on Aug 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 06:30
|
|
|
oh no, looks like the guy giving these broad positive verdicts on american interventionism has no grasp on what actually happened and thinks history started in 2001
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 09:19
|
|
|
Giggle Goose posted:This is an example of the issue I have with the posters in this thread and why I label them apologists. Has it not been pointed out, over and over again, that the sanctions do not target food supplies? Why do you all continue to repeat this? A ship full of soy for venezuela was quite recently forced to change its destination
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 11:16
|
|
|
Doctor Jeep posted:oh no, looks like the guy giving these broad positive verdicts on american interventionism has no grasp on what actually happened and thinks history started in 2001 When they mess things up they take 20 years to go back and fix them. What other country does that?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 11:33
|
|
|
BigFactory posted:When they mess things up they take 20 years to go back and fix them. What other country does that? may you slip, fall, and break an extremity (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 12:48
|
|
|
Doctor Jeep posted:may you slip, fall, and break an extremity I’m starting to think that you’re not a real doctor...
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 13:13
|
|
|
I'm starting to think that you are literally John Wayne.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 13:17
|
|
|
John Charity Spring posted:I'm starting to think that you are literally John Wayne. He’s not with us anymore.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 13:27
|
|
|
BigFactory posted:When they mess things up they take 20 years to go back and fix them. What other country does that? sure they destabilize countries into abject suffering and horror in the name of siphoning resources and destroying their ideological enemies but at least they build roads
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 13:31
|
|
|
This isn’t the US thread.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 14:09
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:This isn’t the US thread. This is like someone barging into a thread about Ukraine and telling people to stop discussing Russian foreign policy goals and methods because "This isn't the Russia thread".
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 15:17
|
|
|
Helsing posted:This is like someone barging into a thread about Ukraine and telling people to stop discussing Russian foreign policy goals and methods because "This isn't the Russia thread". It's in the OP.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 15:49
|
|
|
Discussing how the US government conducts foreign policy in South America and how that relates to its current Venezuela policies is well within the specific limits of this thread:Party Plane Jones posted:
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 16:29
|
|
in an effort to get us out of the weeds any post not specifically about Venezuela is going to get probated. you can, for example:
|
That’s not what is happening and you know it. You’re capable of reading up ten posts.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 16:48
|
|
|
The second biggest problem with "the only reason I constantly deny and apologize for Maduro's beyond-Pinochet-level atrocities is because I think a U.S. intervention would somehow be worse" is that they never address the fact that many countries and institutions besides the U.S. also are ready to do something about Maduro and there is no explanation for why we should think that Canada, Ecuador, and Peru would somehow re-enact Iraq with no differences at all. The BIGGEST problem is that they virulently oppose Venezuela's actual populace overthrowing its dictatorship, support Maduro oppressing his opponents, and equate a victimized population removing its illegitimate regime with hate crimes and ethnic cleansing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 17:49
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:That’s not what is happening and you know it. You’re capable of reading up ten posts. So this is obviously just indicative of a larger difference in how we think about arguments, and I doubt you'll find this convincing, but my thoughts are as follows; what BigFactory is arguing is, near as I can tell, literally the premise of the pro-American intervention argument at this point. There have been numerous posters here arguing that while John Bolton, Eliot Abrahms, Jair Bolsonaro and or course Donald Trump himself are all monstrous individuals, that they are nevertheless doing something inadvertently good for the world by sanctioning the Venezuelan regime and leading an international effort to remove the PSUV from power. If I am being unfair then please point it out, but so far as I can tell this is the explicit argument being made. BigFactory is just extending that argument to cover Afghanistan: yes, he says, the American government is destructive and indifferent to human suffering. However, despite its flaws it put lots of Afghan girls into school and this justifies the invasion and demonstrates that American invasions produce positive outcomes even when they are enacted for bad reasons by monstrous individuals. Yes, talking about Afghanistan is a digression, but it is a digression that came about organically as part of the conversation on how we should evaluate American 21st century foreign policy, which is a debate everyone in this thread has been engaging in on and off for years, whether they can admit it or not. If the conversation hasn't reached a natural conclusion in the next day or so then I'd agree that it would make sense to push it into another thread, but generally speaking this kind of meandering is natural and healthy to a long running discussion about a complex topic. To relate this back to my example from Eastern Europe, imagine we're talking about Ukraine and someone brings up Russia. Suppose one person argues that Russia is just following through on its historical mission of protecting Russian speaking minorities in neighboring countries, a proud and noble tradition dating back to the czars. Another poster disputes this and says actually this is an example of how Russia uses ethnic divisions in foreign nations to sow dissent and instability. In arguing, one of them cites examples in another country, maybe Georgia. Perhaps the one poster gives examples of all the countries where Russia has created huge destabilization or destroyed living standards for its own people, arguing that this clearly refutes the idea that Russian foreign policy is benevolent or has a positive outcome for the populations it is supposedly enacted on behalf of. This would be a digression, but an understandable one that fits within the larger topic of discussion. If the conversation went on too long and was mutating into its own discussion then yes, it would be prudent to move it into its own thread. But within reasonable limits it is, in my opinion, better to let these discussions play out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 18:12
|
|
|
The rule is there literally to get you to stop doing this. And you know that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 18:13
|
|
|
Helsing posted:Discussing how the US government conducts foreign policy in South America and how that relates to its current Venezuela policies is well within the specific limits of this thread: Doctor Jeep posted:may you slip, fall, and break an extremity Hmm I am sensing a problem here
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 18:31
|
|
|
Zidrooner posted:A ship full of soy for venezuela was quite recently forced to change its destination Ah yes, soy, the classic Venezuelan staple food. Guess what, this didn’t actually happen. It’s literally fake news. So fake not even TeleSUR ran with it. Only shady tankie outlets ran the story. The ships intended destination was always Aruba. The Maduro government lied. Huh, wonder what else they’ve lied about.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 20:57
|
|
|
fnox posted:Ah yes, soy, the classic Venezuelan staple food. I found two very amateurish/conspiracy theory-looking/Russian propaganda websites running that story which both said the cargo ship had 25 tons of soy protein on board. That’s a tractor trailer load, not a cargo ship load.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 21:09
|
|
|
Remember when the government also said that Guaidó was working for them in secret, too? Just in case there are still questions about their reliability
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 21:27
|
|
|
BigFactory posted:I found two very amateurish/conspiracy theory-looking/Russian propaganda websites running that story which both said the cargo ship had 25 tons of soy protein on board. That’s a tractor trailer load, not a cargo ship load. This is actually maybe the saddest piece of propaganda I've seen from the government. Part of the government's evidence is a fake Whatsapp screenshot. https://twitter.com/DrodriguezVen/status/1159190941397331970 
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 21:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 17:39 |
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The rule is there literally to get you to stop doing this. And you know that. The rule is there to curtail off topic discussion, but as I just tried to explain to you what is or isn't germane to a conversation about Venezuela is going to fluctuate based on what the posters in the thread are actually talking about. That is how conversations work - they are organic and fluid and their focus evolves over time, reflecting both changing events in the real world and also changes within the participants to the conversation. And that is exactly what's happened here. At the time that Jones made that post back in January most of the thread's discussion was focused on rapidly developing current events: Maduro's new term was just beginning, there were protesters in the streets and Guaido was weeks away from announcing that he was in talks with senior figures in the military. The better part of a year later and there's a lot less daily news flooding into the thread, the immediate possibility of rapid developments has decreased, and the conversation has unsurprisingly started to focus more broadly on what could reasonably be the expected outcome of an American lead intervention designed to oust Maduro now that its clear the Venezuelan military is unlikely to do so on its own, at least for now. Broadly based discussions that previously were outside the scope of the thread have become relevant because in the intervening months almost everyone here has repeatedly brought up their feelings about American foreign policy. This is a natural and frankly inevitable development because there's no road to overthrowing Maduro that doesn't run through the US military establishment. So the reason this became relevant is because the thread regulars made it relevant by talking about it constantly. I'll reiterate: this is how conversations between normal human beings work. They are messy, they slip over a wide range of related and semi-topics, sometimes they circle back to previously discussed issues and attack them from a new angle, at other times they can be frustratingly repetitive, not infrequently the discussion becomes an argument about what is or is not relevant to the discussion. But it's how people communicate and its not inherently a bad thing! In fact it can help produce a healthy balance between breathless speculative talk about current events and bigger picture discussions of how the international system and interstate diplomacy actually works. A proper discussion is framed by some broad guidelines but ought to have plenty of room to expand or retract in focus depending on where the individual participants are at. The proper role of moderation, I would argue, is to guide this process, occasionally prodding people back onto topic when the conversation is stuck but otherwise making some reasonable allowances for people to explore the topic in the way that makes sense to them as individuals.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2019 22:20
|
|