Unfortunately, this comes off like, "My authoritative UN sources say..."
If you consider the UN to be an authoritative source, I think you've already swerved away from the truth. This really does read like a virtual smorgasbord of confirmation bias via a manicured selection of isolated incidents which fit your foregone conclusion: Orange man wants oil, so war it must be!
If you really want to be dissident, how about trying sampling boots-on-the-ground sources, like, well I dunno, how about Transparencia Venezuela? If your cared to look, their analysis begs to differ with the misleading UN report. The way they state it, Venezuela has already become a key hub for illicit drug trafficking. Try reading past page 3 of this report and continue asserting that Venezuela's government can be trusted to tell the UN anything nearing the reality of what's going on there.
The US is not being attacked. It is violating the Geneva Conventions and starting an illegal war, whether it is to steal their oil or help the CIA's drug trade...er...fight drug traffickers in Venezuela. The only time the US military will work to fight drug traffickers is when they compete with the CIA.
If drug usage is an issue in the USA, then the US should address the issues driving so many to abuse drugs in the USA.
(1) There are U.S. strikes tied to counternarcotics operations near Venezuela; calling it a “war of aggression” is an assertion, not a settled legal fact. The (so far) 4 destroyed narco-runner boats is a clear use of force, but use of force does not constitute declared war. It has not even been recognized as international armed conflict.
Whether it’s “aggression” turns on UN-Charter legality (self-defense/UNSC authorization/consent). (Might want to look up Somali Pirate operations as an example here, but let's just say your assertion falls way short of the legal bar.) As of today, there's been no such legal determination.
(2) Clearly you know nothing about the Geneva Conventions, because they aren’t the right legal hook for 'starting' a war; the UN Charter is, so your fervent clamoring about "violating the Geneva Conventions" is just silly.
(3) Claims about the CIA running the drug trade are not supported by official investigations. Fun fact: CIA Conspiracy theories are cheaper by the dozen.
(4) Your “oil/cover story” angle is just more speculation absent evidence. Come up with some actual evidence sometime.
(5) Demand-side measures are one pillar of drug policy. (The UNODC World Drug Report 2025 highlights the role of demand/supply dynamics.) That doesn’t make *supply-side* interdiction “illegal” by itself; legality depends on UN-Charter justifications (self-defense, UNSC mandate, consent) and where the force occurred (territorial waters vs. international waters.)
That we've just begun supply-side interdiction and folks like yourself scramble to blow the war horns is indicative not of sober analysis, but plain old unctuous political fervor.
Bottom line: There's an abundance of speculation, little if any is based in sobriety. There may be broader moves not yet considered. It remains to be seen what comes from this new supply-side interdiction.
Trump blew up some boats. He CLAIMS they are drug running. Drug running doesn't constitute the death penalty. If they care about drug and the law, they'll wait until the fishing boats are in US legal jurisdiction.
Let's say Putin blew up fishing boats off the Coast of Washington DC. How would you frame this action?
The US is committing acts of war...period.
You can believe their claims. But, they have a history of lying about almost everything.
You don't recall Trump complaining that Biden had to "buy" Venezuela oil during his campaign speeches? He said Venezuela was ready to collapse during Trump's first term and the US could have stole their oil. After Biden blew up Nordstream, the US had to negotiate with Venezuela and buy their oil.
I will concede that the US is merely preparing for an illegal war, and hasn't fully started it yet.
However, given the Pentagon's history, it is inevitable.
Typically, the US Coast Guard and DEA are involved in off-shore drug operations...and they don't destroy all the evidence, witnesses, potential sources of information and kill everyone. Then, show their snuff film publicly.
I know it is common inside the US, when cops kill people they claim have drugs, but internationally due process and the Magna Carta are still recognized.
Pointing out the history of the US's serial lies about wars is not "whataboutism."
The US has lied about wars, done false flags and/or provoked all its wars dating back to the Spanish/American war.
I grew up watching Charlie Brown and learned not to trust a repeat liar.
If you're not aware of the CIA's history, read some books. There's plenty of evidence.
Here's a summary of some of their activities, when they were "fighting communism."
Do we know where Transparencia gets its money? Coz it's not like the US to fund anti-government organisations in countries it wants to regime charge...
I browsed the 2024 financial statements of the parent organization, Transparency International, and it seemed to be the usual: USA, Canada and European countries, as well as major corporations from those parts, provide the vast majority of their total funding. I don't know Spanish so I can't speak for Transparency Venezuela specifically, but I doubt they get less funding from the US than the parent org does.
Yeah, I did too. Usual gamut of western governments, NGOs, and corporations.
Doesn't mean there isn't some corruption in Venezuela - show me a place without any - but it does suggest a likely agenda.
Didn't bother replying to Michael, couldn't see the point. He's probably delighted that the woman who wants the US - or even Israel - to invade her country and become a puppet was given the Nobel prize.
Why not research that yourself? Why don't you put just a tiny bit of effort into looking beyond the stuff you want to believe?
Go ahead. Try it sometime.
Maybe, just maybe, you'd discover Transparencia Venezuela is a chapter of a larger, multi-national organization founded in 1993. And maybe, just maybe you'd read about WHY Transparencia Venezuela was formed in 2004.
Then, if you even make it that far, ask -- why would *anyone* do this kind of thing? Would any amount of money be worth it? To report against corrupt government officials in a 3rd world authoritarian regime who are in bed with the cartels is pretty much a recipe for your body and the bodies of your family and friends disappearing.
So he’s forcing the pace of peace in the Middle East and you hate that because you love the war, so now the bullshit machine turns to Venezuela. Trump takes out drug runners and suddenly it’s regime change in human rights violations.
"Every once in a while, we have to throw some small, weak country up against a wall just to show the rest of the world who's boss." - The Pentagon, probably
With Machado winning the Nobel it's hard not to suspect this is all part of some globalist conspiracy to justify US intervention in Venezuela. Nuking lanchas full of poor people and then calling it drug trafficking with no evidence to speak of is alarming, to say the least. Drugs or not, those were poor people desperate for money; the capos are safe in a finca somewhere. And last I checked, the punishment for drug trafficking wasn't summary execution by drone strike.
Incidentally, most of the cocaine leaves from Guayaquil in Ecuador or Colombia's Pacific Coast, before stopping off in Mexico to get cut with fentanyl before crossing mostly by land into the U.S. I live in Colombia and I've never even heard of the "Cartel de los soles." As far as I can tell, they don't actually seem to exist.
I see hostility, which certainly exists on both sides. Venezuela’s government has been this level of hostile a priori, just with different means.
What I don’t see is a path to any kind of success with the US forces on hand. Nor any appetite in America for another major engagement. I wouldn’t lose too much sleep.
Trump, and his regime, seem to be more and more accepting of the "Democratic" line as time goes on. Here, he's adopted, full on, Obama's signature "Signature Strike" executive drone-murder program, which he's prudently limited to our own back yard. And now Rubio is touting Hillary's signature anal bayonet rape and murder move, which he's flying like a flag.
It's a marvelous reconciliation and synthesizing of objectives and tactics, all in the name of that common, hallowed, eternal, bipartisan goal of regime change for resource plunder.
If Trump could get Cheney onboard, perhaps the latter could then lend his weight as an elder statesman, to inveigle full support from Harris, whose ear he has, who's been itching to get into that international politics game again, anyway. She's got some great new ideas, which she's willing to share, which start with genocide, and end with genocide, and have a creamy genocide center.
And then we could all gather in a circle and raise a glass for a lusty, full-throated chorus of that grand old chestnut, "The Regime Change Kumbaya", and lift a gartered thigh for the reinvigorated NeoCon Can-Can.
And watch, as the joined-at-the-hip twins, Stephen Miller and Elliot Abrams, dance the kazotsky, as the sun never sets on a Great Again America...
I don't think you are a Democrat party supporter. But I find it strange that any mentions about actions, policy etc against Venezuela that happened on the Dems' watch were light touch and no reference to the president at the time. 1998 - Clinton, 2014 - Obama. Yet Bush and even Reagan are mentioned.
I know orange man is horrendous, but this is bipartisan US imperialist policy. The piece shows this, but not explicitly enough. Trump just up front about it all.
It's ugly in Venezuela, my dad has cousins (I've never met) whove been stuck in the mess of Venezuela for years. It was refreshing to get some details into the complexity of all that is going on.
Unfortunately, this comes off like, "My authoritative UN sources say..."
If you consider the UN to be an authoritative source, I think you've already swerved away from the truth. This really does read like a virtual smorgasbord of confirmation bias via a manicured selection of isolated incidents which fit your foregone conclusion: Orange man wants oil, so war it must be!
If you really want to be dissident, how about trying sampling boots-on-the-ground sources, like, well I dunno, how about Transparencia Venezuela? If your cared to look, their analysis begs to differ with the misleading UN report. The way they state it, Venezuela has already become a key hub for illicit drug trafficking. Try reading past page 3 of this report and continue asserting that Venezuela's government can be trusted to tell the UN anything nearing the reality of what's going on there.
https://transparenciave.org/economias-ilicitas/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Drug-Trafficking-in-Venezuela-2024.-Transparencia-Venezuela-en-el-exilio.pdf
So who are you going to believe? Boots on the ground, or grifting UN suits with open pockets and axes to grind against the USA?
If you side with the UN, please don't try to pass this mush off as somehow 'dissident.' It's laughable.
The US is starting an illegal war of aggression.
The US is not being attacked. It is violating the Geneva Conventions and starting an illegal war, whether it is to steal their oil or help the CIA's drug trade...er...fight drug traffickers in Venezuela. The only time the US military will work to fight drug traffickers is when they compete with the CIA.
If drug usage is an issue in the USA, then the US should address the issues driving so many to abuse drugs in the USA.
(1) There are U.S. strikes tied to counternarcotics operations near Venezuela; calling it a “war of aggression” is an assertion, not a settled legal fact. The (so far) 4 destroyed narco-runner boats is a clear use of force, but use of force does not constitute declared war. It has not even been recognized as international armed conflict.
Whether it’s “aggression” turns on UN-Charter legality (self-defense/UNSC authorization/consent). (Might want to look up Somali Pirate operations as an example here, but let's just say your assertion falls way short of the legal bar.) As of today, there's been no such legal determination.
(2) Clearly you know nothing about the Geneva Conventions, because they aren’t the right legal hook for 'starting' a war; the UN Charter is, so your fervent clamoring about "violating the Geneva Conventions" is just silly.
(3) Claims about the CIA running the drug trade are not supported by official investigations. Fun fact: CIA Conspiracy theories are cheaper by the dozen.
(4) Your “oil/cover story” angle is just more speculation absent evidence. Come up with some actual evidence sometime.
(5) Demand-side measures are one pillar of drug policy. (The UNODC World Drug Report 2025 highlights the role of demand/supply dynamics.) That doesn’t make *supply-side* interdiction “illegal” by itself; legality depends on UN-Charter justifications (self-defense, UNSC mandate, consent) and where the force occurred (territorial waters vs. international waters.)
That we've just begun supply-side interdiction and folks like yourself scramble to blow the war horns is indicative not of sober analysis, but plain old unctuous political fervor.
Bottom line: There's an abundance of speculation, little if any is based in sobriety. There may be broader moves not yet considered. It remains to be seen what comes from this new supply-side interdiction.
OK.
I guess there really were WMDs in Iraq too?
Trump blew up some boats. He CLAIMS they are drug running. Drug running doesn't constitute the death penalty. If they care about drug and the law, they'll wait until the fishing boats are in US legal jurisdiction.
Let's say Putin blew up fishing boats off the Coast of Washington DC. How would you frame this action?
The US is committing acts of war...period.
You can believe their claims. But, they have a history of lying about almost everything.
You don't recall Trump complaining that Biden had to "buy" Venezuela oil during his campaign speeches? He said Venezuela was ready to collapse during Trump's first term and the US could have stole their oil. After Biden blew up Nordstream, the US had to negotiate with Venezuela and buy their oil.
Oh here it goes... Let's play rampant 'whataboutisms.'
I'm simply pointing out the conjecture here isn't supported by facts.
You are of course free to spin whatever tale that your heart desires.
In your case, the juice ain't worth the squeeze.
Have a nice day.
I will concede that the US is merely preparing for an illegal war, and hasn't fully started it yet.
However, given the Pentagon's history, it is inevitable.
Typically, the US Coast Guard and DEA are involved in off-shore drug operations...and they don't destroy all the evidence, witnesses, potential sources of information and kill everyone. Then, show their snuff film publicly.
I know it is common inside the US, when cops kill people they claim have drugs, but internationally due process and the Magna Carta are still recognized.
Pointing out the history of the US's serial lies about wars is not "whataboutism."
The US has lied about wars, done false flags and/or provoked all its wars dating back to the Spanish/American war.
I grew up watching Charlie Brown and learned not to trust a repeat liar.
If you're not aware of the CIA's history, read some books. There's plenty of evidence.
Here's a summary of some of their activities, when they were "fighting communism."
https://irp.fas.org/congress/1998_cr/980507-l.htm
Don't waste your time, Karl. It's like arguing with the hasbarists when Israel is the topic. They ain't interested in reality or truth.
Peace, man ✌️
Blowing up random fishing boats and destroying Venezuela will stop drugs how?
Do you really believe this?
How did prohibition work with alcohol and weed?
Why are so many Americans turning to drugs?
They'll find the drugs if they need them.
This is about taking out the competition of CIA drug running...and stealing Venezuelan oil.
Do we know where Transparencia gets its money? Coz it's not like the US to fund anti-government organisations in countries it wants to regime charge...
I browsed the 2024 financial statements of the parent organization, Transparency International, and it seemed to be the usual: USA, Canada and European countries, as well as major corporations from those parts, provide the vast majority of their total funding. I don't know Spanish so I can't speak for Transparency Venezuela specifically, but I doubt they get less funding from the US than the parent org does.
So yeah, pretty much what you probably expected.
Yeah, I did too. Usual gamut of western governments, NGOs, and corporations.
Doesn't mean there isn't some corruption in Venezuela - show me a place without any - but it does suggest a likely agenda.
Didn't bother replying to Michael, couldn't see the point. He's probably delighted that the woman who wants the US - or even Israel - to invade her country and become a puppet was given the Nobel prize.
Why not research that yourself? Why don't you put just a tiny bit of effort into looking beyond the stuff you want to believe?
Go ahead. Try it sometime.
Maybe, just maybe, you'd discover Transparencia Venezuela is a chapter of a larger, multi-national organization founded in 1993. And maybe, just maybe you'd read about WHY Transparencia Venezuela was formed in 2004.
Then, if you even make it that far, ask -- why would *anyone* do this kind of thing? Would any amount of money be worth it? To report against corrupt government officials in a 3rd world authoritarian regime who are in bed with the cartels is pretty much a recipe for your body and the bodies of your family and friends disappearing.
So he’s forcing the pace of peace in the Middle East and you hate that because you love the war, so now the bullshit machine turns to Venezuela. Trump takes out drug runners and suddenly it’s regime change in human rights violations.
"Every once in a while, we have to throw some small, weak country up against a wall just to show the rest of the world who's boss." - The Pentagon, probably
With Machado winning the Nobel it's hard not to suspect this is all part of some globalist conspiracy to justify US intervention in Venezuela. Nuking lanchas full of poor people and then calling it drug trafficking with no evidence to speak of is alarming, to say the least. Drugs or not, those were poor people desperate for money; the capos are safe in a finca somewhere. And last I checked, the punishment for drug trafficking wasn't summary execution by drone strike.
Incidentally, most of the cocaine leaves from Guayaquil in Ecuador or Colombia's Pacific Coast, before stopping off in Mexico to get cut with fentanyl before crossing mostly by land into the U.S. I live in Colombia and I've never even heard of the "Cartel de los soles." As far as I can tell, they don't actually seem to exist.
Anything to stop the release of the Epstein files, right?
He can't beat Yemen, Iran or Hamas...so...why not a new 20 year war closer to home?
Trump wants to beat Obama's records. Obama got a Nobel Peace Prize and started five new, illegal wars.
Trump wants more.
Anglo-American policy these days: "we'll kill anyone we want, anywhere in the world, for whatever reason we say."
Let's hope he doesn't adopt the Zelinsky strategy and institute martial law, cancel elections, etc.
I see hostility, which certainly exists on both sides. Venezuela’s government has been this level of hostile a priori, just with different means.
What I don’t see is a path to any kind of success with the US forces on hand. Nor any appetite in America for another major engagement. I wouldn’t lose too much sleep.
The US terrorism must be stopped! Time China cut off their funding!
Well, if true, it might be a very good thing for the people of Venezuela.
……and how’s that working out for America?
20+ years of FAILURE in trying……..
Do you think drugs are NOT coming into the United States from Venezuela? We see right through your horseshit. You hate Americans and want us dead.
Keep falling, guys.
Always lower.
And Trump is bragging about their intention.
It will not work, it cannot last.
And again it is further hurting the US’s badly harmed image.
100% wrong, 100% bad, 100% nefarious.
100% loser & 100% evil.
Trump, and his regime, seem to be more and more accepting of the "Democratic" line as time goes on. Here, he's adopted, full on, Obama's signature "Signature Strike" executive drone-murder program, which he's prudently limited to our own back yard. And now Rubio is touting Hillary's signature anal bayonet rape and murder move, which he's flying like a flag.
It's a marvelous reconciliation and synthesizing of objectives and tactics, all in the name of that common, hallowed, eternal, bipartisan goal of regime change for resource plunder.
If Trump could get Cheney onboard, perhaps the latter could then lend his weight as an elder statesman, to inveigle full support from Harris, whose ear he has, who's been itching to get into that international politics game again, anyway. She's got some great new ideas, which she's willing to share, which start with genocide, and end with genocide, and have a creamy genocide center.
And then we could all gather in a circle and raise a glass for a lusty, full-throated chorus of that grand old chestnut, "The Regime Change Kumbaya", and lift a gartered thigh for the reinvigorated NeoCon Can-Can.
And watch, as the joined-at-the-hip twins, Stephen Miller and Elliot Abrams, dance the kazotsky, as the sun never sets on a Great Again America...
US crime …
Maduro is quite hated and this could succeed, like the 1989 intervention in Panama.
Unfortunately, the Trump Administration is not the GHWB Administration. These clowns are bound to screw it up somehow.
Hi
I don't think you are a Democrat party supporter. But I find it strange that any mentions about actions, policy etc against Venezuela that happened on the Dems' watch were light touch and no reference to the president at the time. 1998 - Clinton, 2014 - Obama. Yet Bush and even Reagan are mentioned.
I know orange man is horrendous, but this is bipartisan US imperialist policy. The piece shows this, but not explicitly enough. Trump just up front about it all.
It's ugly in Venezuela, my dad has cousins (I've never met) whove been stuck in the mess of Venezuela for years. It was refreshing to get some details into the complexity of all that is going on.