The Venezuela thread

What Do You Think About This?

  • Doesn't really make sense.

    Votes: 11 16.2%

  • Unnecessary.

    Votes: 22 32.4%

  • I love it! We can get more oil!

    Votes: 21 30.9%

  • I can see why it might happen, but not comfortable with it.

    Votes: 14 20.6%
  • Total voters
    68
#328
#328
Constitutional justification should prove interesting here. Naturally, Trump has no problem violating international laws.

Executing an outstanding arrest warrant will probably be the Admin's response.

Begs the question, has the United States has never snatched a sitting foreign president from another sovereign country to execute an arrest warrant?

Short answer: **No.**
The United States has **never executed an arrest warrant by abducting (“snatching”) a sitting foreign president from the territory of a sovereign state.**

That said, there are a few **important near-misses and commonly confused cases** that help explain why this question comes up.

---

## What has *not* happened

* **No sitting head of state or president** has ever been seized abroad by U.S. agents pursuant to a U.S. arrest warrant.
* Doing so would be an **extraordinary violation of international law**, including:

* State sovereignty
* Head-of-state immunity
* The UN Charter (use of force)

Such an act would almost certainly be treated as an **act of war**.

---

## Closest historical analogues (but still not the same)

### 1. **Manuel Noriega (Panama, 1989)**

* Noriega was **indicted in U.S. courts** on drug charges.
* The U.S. **invaded Panama**, deposed his government, and captured him.
* He was then brought to the U.S. and prosecuted.

**Why this doesn’t count:**

* He was not abducted covertly.
* He was captured during a **full-scale military invasion**, after the U.S. effectively destroyed the Panamanian state’s ability to resist.
* Noriega was a *de facto* ruler, not a democratically recognized sitting president at the time.

This is the **closest case**, but still fundamentally different from “snatching” a president from a functioning sovereign state.

---

### 2. **United States v. Alvarez-Machain (1990)**

* A Mexican doctor was **kidnapped by U.S.-hired agents** from Mexico and brought to the U.S. for trial.
* The U.S. Supreme Court ruled the trial could proceed despite the abduction.

**Why this doesn’t count:**

* The target was **not a head of state**.
* The case caused **severe diplomatic fallout** and Mexico strongly protested.
* It is often cited as a **warning example**, not a precedent for leaders.

---

### 3. **Extraordinary renditions**

* The CIA has abducted terrorism suspects from foreign countries.
* These were **non-state actors**, not presidents or heads of government.
* Several such cases resulted in **criminal convictions of U.S. agents abroad** (e.g., Italy’s Abu Omar case).

---

## Why a sitting president is different

Under customary international law and treaties:

* Sitting heads of state enjoy **personal immunity (immunity ratione personae)**.
* This immunity applies **even for serious crimes**, unless:

* Their own state waives immunity, or
* They are arrested by an **international tribunal** with proper jurisdiction (e.g., ICC — and even then enforcement is difficult).

The U.S. has **never attempted** to override this immunity through unilateral abduction.

---

## Bottom line

* **No**, the United States has never seized a sitting foreign president from another sovereign country to execute an arrest warrant.
* The closest cases involved **military invasions, non-presidents, or covert renditions of private individuals**.
* Doing so to a president would almost certainly trigger **global diplomatic crisis or armed conflict**.

If you’re asking in connection with a **current legal or geopolitical situation**, I can e
xplain how precedent, immunity, and enforcement would likely be analyzed today.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FLVOL_79
#329
#329
MontyPython said:
Constitutional justification should prove interesting here. Naturally, Trump has no problem violating international laws.

Executing an outstanding arrest warrant will probably be the Admin's response.

Begs the question, has the United States has never snatched a sitting foreign president from another sovereign country to execute an arrest warrant?

Short answer: **No.**
The United States has **never executed an arrest warrant by abducting (“snatching”) a sitting foreign president from the territory of a sovereign state.**

That said, there are a few **important near-misses and commonly confused cases** that help explain why this question comes up.

---

## What has *not* happened

* **No sitting head of state or president** has ever been seized abroad by U.S. agents pursuant to a U.S. arrest warrant.
* Doing so would be an **extraordinary violation of international law**, including:

* State sovereignty
* Head-of-state immunity
* The UN Charter (use of force)

Such an act would almost certainly be treated as an **act of war**.

---

## Closest historical analogues (but still not the same)

### 1. **Manuel Noriega (Panama, 1989)**

* Noriega was **indicted in U.S. courts** on drug charges.
* The U.S. **invaded Panama**, deposed his government, and captured him.
* He was then brought to the U.S. and prosecuted.

**Why this doesn’t count:**

* He was not abducted covertly.
* He was captured during a **full-scale military invasion**, after the U.S. effectively destroyed the Panamanian state’s ability to resist.
* Noriega was a *de facto* ruler, not a democratically recognized sitting president at the time.

This is the **closest case**, but still fundamentally different from “snatching” a president from a functioning sovereign state.

---

### 2. **United States v. Alvarez-Machain (1990)**

* A Mexican doctor was **kidnapped by U.S.-hired agents** from Mexico and brought to the U.S. for trial.
* The U.S. Supreme Court ruled the trial could proceed despite the abduction.

**Why this doesn’t count:**

* The target was **not a head of state**.
* The case caused **severe diplomatic fallout** and Mexico strongly protested.
* It is often cited as a **warning example**, not a precedent for leaders.

---

### 3. **Extraordinary renditions**

* The CIA has abducted terrorism suspects from foreign countries.
* These were **non-state actors**, not presidents or heads of government.
* Several such cases resulted in **criminal convictions of U.S. agents abroad** (e.g., Italy’s Abu Omar case).

---

## Why a sitting president is different

Under customary international law and treaties:

* Sitting heads of state enjoy **personal immunity (immunity ratione personae)**.
* This immunity applies **even for serious crimes**, unless:

* Their own state waives immunity, or
* They are arrested by an **international tribunal** with proper jurisdiction (e.g., ICC — and even then enforcement is difficult).

The U.S. has **never attempted** to override this immunity through unilateral abduction.

---

## Bottom line

* **No**, the United States has never seized a sitting foreign president from another sovereign country to execute an arrest warrant.
* The closest cases involved **military invasions, non-presidents, or covert renditions of private individuals**.
* Doing so to a president would almost certainly trigger **global diplomatic crisis or armed conflict**.

If you’re asking in connection with a **current legal or geopolitical situation**, I can e
xplain how precedent, immunity, and enforcement would likely be analyzed today.
Click to expand...
Legally he's not the sitting Venezuelan President
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, Thunder Good-Oil, MAD and 3 others
#334
#334
Just checking in here to see if anyone is calling this an act of war because from sounds of it, a 2 hour military operation that was somewhat negotiated by the people we captured hardly seems to fit the bill of act of war or invasion lol
 
#335
#335
MontyPython said:
Unbelievable that Delta Force could snatch a foreign President like this.

Kudos to our military.

As for Maduro, I don't see how this could have happened without someone very close to him providing active intelligence. He was likely betrayed big time.

Captured alive is absolutely stunning.

Rare thing for me to say, but, nice work Trump. In this case, I think the ends justify the means. Maduro was a dirtbag who rigged elections and remains an enemy of our State.

Now... will the people of Venezuela topple the current government. This is where things get thorny.

The genie is out of the bottle...
Click to expand...
Maduro is not a "foreign president"
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, Thunder Good-Oil, Carl Pickens and 3 others
#336
#336
JMSqb11 said:
Just checking in here to see if anyone is calling this an act of war because from sounds of it, a 2 hour military operation that was somewhat negotiated by the people we captured hardly seems to fit the bill of act of war or invasion lol
Click to expand...
opinions will be predictable
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carl Pickens
#338
#338
www.breitbart.com

Coons: Trump Should Go After Russian Ghost Tankers Like He's Doing with Venezuela's

On Friday's broadcast of MS NOW's "Morning Joe," Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) said that President Trump has been going after oil tankers because there's "this | Clips
www.breitbart.com www.breitbart.com

Coons said, “In Venezuela, he’s been sleepwalking, without a clear policy or a clear path forward, into a conflict with one of our hemisphere’s most capable authoritarian regimes. Has this really been about interdicting drugs? Maduro’s willing to negotiate about stopping the regime’s support for drug trafficking. Is this about access to oil? That is something President Trump’s talked about, and his Chief of Staff, Susie Wiles, admitted in a Vanity Fair article that, frankly, this is about regime change. In neither case does it make sense, with no plan for what would come next, for us to use American soldiers and military force to directly try to overthrow Maduro. So, this might be the off-ramp that Trump needs.”

Looks like he had a plan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, USF grad in TN and tim
#339
#339
tim said:
opinions will be predictable
Click to expand...

As a self described Trump hater conservative, I am absolutely here for all the mental gymnastics from people who would have cried at Biden doing this during his 4 years and are now pushing and supporting this while those who are crying now about Trump's actions who would have been quiet about Biden's admin doing this when they had a noted track record at being very inefficient in these types of military operations.

Anyone who hated Trump and Biden is really enjoying this past year because everyone on both sides have zero credibility or relevance to make an argument because they were either quiet the last 4 years or are quiet now. I've had more popcorn the last calendar year.
 
#342
#342
JMSqb11 said:
Just to clarify, we are moving the goal posts of peace and no new wars to "short duration military operations" ? lol
Click to expand...
When it comes to the western hemisphere, we better make sure our neighbors act right. Call it what you want, this is exactly what the “war on drugs” should’ve been all along. Colombia and Mexico should be next
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#343
#343
FLVOL_79 said:
MAGA gonna treat this like Bin Laden. Sooooo desperate to out do Obama at any cost. lol.
Click to expand...
Only took a month or two, will probably have more impact on the US then OSB. Cozying up with Cuba, Russia, and China at our back door is much more dangerous than a well funded group of goat raping inbreds
 
#344
#344
AI Overview



As of today, January 3, 2026,
Nicolás Maduro has reportedly been captured by U.S. forces following military strikes on Venezuela and flown out of the country to stand trial on criminal charges in the United States.
Regarding deaths associated with his rule, the "Maduro death toll" refers to various figures over the years, stemming from government crackdowns, extrajudicial killings, and related violence.
Specific reported death tolls linked to Maduro's government include:
  • Extrajudicial Killings: A 2019 United Nations investigation reported that Venezuelan security forces killed 5,287 people in 2018 and another 1,569 by mid-May 2019 in what the government officially termed "Operations for the Liberation of the People". Independent reports from that time suggested the actual number could be over 9,000.
  • Protest-Related Deaths:
    • Protests in 2014 resulted in 43 deaths, including government supporters and opponents.
    • In April 2017, nearly 30 people were killed in a month of demonstrations.
    • An NGO, Foro Penal, reported 11 civilian deaths in a single day in July 2024 during protests against Maduro's questioned re-election.
  • General Violence: In 2018, Venezuela had one of the world's highest murder rates, with 81.4 killings per 100,000 people, although not all were directly attributable to state actions.
  • Recent Incidents: There were no immediate casualty figures available from the U.S. strikes that led to Maduro's reported capture, but the Venezuelan government reported that the "imperialist attack" had cost the lives of officials, military personnel, and civilians across the country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmacvols1
#345
#345
JMSqb11 said:
As a self described Trump hater conservative, I am absolutely here for all the mental gymnastics from people who would have cried at Biden doing this during his 4 years and are now pushing and supporting this while those who are crying now about Trump's actions who would have been quiet about Biden's admin doing this when they had a noted track record at being very inefficient in these types of military operations.

Anyone who hated Trump and Biden is really enjoying this past year because everyone on both sides have zero credibility or relevance to make an argument because they were either quiet the last 4 years or are quiet now. I've had more popcorn the last calendar year.
Click to expand...
. IMO, his biggest achievement was blowing up the Russian pipeline, Ironically he wouldn’t admit it. The withdrawal from Afghanistan had to be the worst military exercise in decades. The same military just executed a seemingly flawless removal of a despot. Leadership matters
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, SlipKidVol and rekinhavoc
#350
#350
tim said:
. IMO, his biggest achievement was blowing up the Russian pipeline, Ironically he wouldn’t admit it. The withdrawal from Afghanistan had to be the worst military exercise in decades. The same military just executed a seemingly flawless removal of a despot. Leadership matters
Click to expand...

My issues with the Afghanistan withdrawal is that he died on a hill “we were forced to exit because of a deal gave us” which I think is asinine.

Trump was given the Iran deal and the Paris climate deal and he pulled out. If Biden truly felt he was in a position of no choice, he was an idiot. He didn’t have to exit by a certain date if he really didn’t want to.

While I’m no Trump fan, his military operations largely tend to be overwhelmingly better and more efficient than Biden’s. I’m not gonna call it due to woke but Trump has put an emphasis over strength and simplicity in these arenas where Biden did not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carl Pickens
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top