The Venezuela thread

What Do You Think About This?

  • Doesn't really make sense.

    Votes: 11 15.5%
  • Unnecessary.

    Votes: 23 32.4%
  • I love it! We can get more oil!

    Votes: 23 32.4%
  • I can see why it might happen, but not comfortable with it.

    Votes: 14 19.7%

  • Total voters
    71
I'm not saying that at all. I'm questioning LG's accusation that Trump promised on the campaign trail not to engage in ANY foreign military engagements. He's having trouble proving it.

You're trying to convince me that the dog has 9 legs, and having trouble proving it, so you call me insane by attributing an argument that I'm not making. I'm not defending or condemning the engagements in Venezuela or Iran. I'm defining them in comparison to Trump's campaign promises, as I understood them.

So, by saying that it could lead to war, you're admitting that it is not war? Or are you just wanting to keep talking in circles?

I am thinking at this moment a very heavy thing fell on your head.
 
  • Like
Reactions: adam.vol
At this point Trump will go down as one of the great strategic foreign policy POTUSs in a long time.

If this Venezuela regime change is successful it could have a positive impact felt around the world.
It would seem like things might be a little hazy here...



If this Venezuela regime change is successful it could have a positive impact felt around the world.

And in theory, eventually in millions of years that the U.S. paying and military support terrorist groups in the middle east will have a positive impact, especially among the groups that have killed 1000s of americans.

Al Qaeda says they need more funds, go ahead and send some of the Venezuelan oil money to them so they can distribute it to ISIS, also they're sorry about the whole blowing up buildings thing.

Death Toll Rises As Fighting Expands Between Syrian Army & Kurds In Aleppo | ZeroHedge
 
Last edited:
The mentally ill left: “we know better what’s good for you Venezuelans”

The Hamas supporter “Gaza Barbie” lashes out at a Venezuelan woman "with indigenous features" for celebrating Maduro's fall​


Translation…
A welcome return. The Spanish woman
Ana Alcalde, better known as Gaza Barbie during her time aboard the Flotilla, furious with a Venezuelan woman, seen on the street, who was thanking Trump for removing Maduro. Alcalde can't get over it and scolds the woman in a video because, having Indigenous features, she should have been with Chavez and Maduro who "liberated" her civilization and not with the colonizers. Then the final assertion: Americans have never brought freedom to any country.

 
Chess while some (Dems) want to play checkers.



That's like saying, the bank is safe because its no longer taking deposits. How exactly does Glenn think this all works - the U.S. isn't getting a better deal than what it has.

How exactly is China and the rest of the world going to send Glenn all that stuff in his studio without resources?
 
Last edited:
At this point Trump will go down as one of the great strategic foreign policy POTUSs in a long time.

If this Venezuela regime change is successful it could have a positive impact felt around the world.
McGraw Hill will surely give him credit as one of their all time greats.

 
  • Like
Reactions: LSU-SIU
Hey man, I learned yesterday that the U.S. could launch its whole nuclear arsenal on the world and its not war or an act of war.

We learn something new everyday.
Go back and read, hombre. It kind of looks like you may need to invest some time learning how, but it will be worth your efforts.

War | History, Causes, Types, Meaning, Examples, & Facts | Britannica

War, in the popular sense, a conflict between political groups involving hostilities of considerable duration and magnitude. Sociologists usually apply the term to such conflicts only if they are initiated and conducted in accordance with socially recognized forms.
www.britannica.com
www.britannica.com
war, in the popular sense, a conflict between political groups involving hostilities of considerable duration and magnitude. In the usage of social science, certain qualifications are added. Sociologists usually apply the term to such conflicts only if they are initiated and conducted in accordance with socially recognized forms. They treat war as an institution recognized in custom or in law. Military writers usually confine the term to hostilities in which the contending groups are sufficiently equal in power to render the outcome uncertain for a time. Armed conflicts of powerful states with isolated and powerless peoples are usually called pacifications, military expeditions, or explorations; with small states, they are called interventions or reprisals; and with internal groups, rebellions or insurrections. Such incidents, if the resistance is sufficiently strong or protracted, may achieve a magnitude that entitles them to the name “war.”

Here. I'll make it even easier.

Military writers usually confine the term to hostilities in which the contending groups are sufficiently equal in power to render the outcome uncertain for a time. Armed conflicts of powerful states with isolated and powerless peoples are usually called pacifications, military expeditions, or explorations; with small states, they are called interventions or reprisals; and with internal groups, rebellions or insurrections.

So, it would appear that if the US unleashed its entire nuclear arsenal against Venezuela, it would not be classified as a war. If we released it against Russia, it may be classified as war if they indeed have the nuclear capacity to respond in kind. If both were destroyed in short order, there probably wouldn't be anyone to call it anything.

But we didn't unleash the entirety of our nuclear arsenal. We selectively and tactically bombed Venezuela, kidnapped their kidnapper, and the cartel regime couldn't do **** about it. It in no way meets the criteria of "endless wars" and "nation building" that Trump promised against--which is the context of the discussion, no matter how badly you wish you could win a debate via red herrings.

But you're not really arguing with me. You seem to be arguing with the general consensus of the definitions of war. Feel free. I'll just reiterate that you are a massive waste of time.
 
Go back and read, hombre. It kind of looks like you may need to invest some time learning how, but it will be worth your efforts.

War | History, Causes, Types, Meaning, Examples, & Facts | Britannica

War, in the popular sense, a conflict between political groups involving hostilities of considerable duration and magnitude. Sociologists usually apply the term to such conflicts only if they are initiated and conducted in accordance with socially recognized forms.
www.britannica.com
www.britannica.com


Here. I'll make it even easier.



So, it would appear that if the US unleashed its entire nuclear arsenal against Venezuela, it would not be classified as a war. If we released it against Russia, it may be classified as war if they indeed have the nuclear capacity to respond in kind. If both were destroyed in short order, there probably wouldn't be anyone to call it anything.

But we didn't unleash the entirety of our nuclear arsenal. We selectively and tactically bombed Venezuela, kidnapped their kidnapper, and the cartel regime couldn't do **** about it. It in no way meets the criteria of "endless wars" and "nation building" that Trump promised against--which is the context of the discussion, no matter how badly you wish you could win a debate via red herrings.

But you're not really arguing with me. You seem to be arguing with the general consensus of the definitions of war. Feel free. I'll just reiterate that you are a massive waste of time.

I'm apparently having problems with definitions.

But we didn't unleash the entirety of our nuclear arsenal.

It would be just a temporary military engagement either way. I got it.

But you're not really arguing with me.

I'm not arguing, I'm learning man.
 

Advertisement



Back
Top