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
#1,901
#1,901
Orange_Crush said:
What's laughable is that you still can't or won't provide context for Trump's "promises". Nothing in your quotes so far have equated to Trump promising not to do what he's done with Iran and venezuela.

I'll ask again. Did Trump promise no military actions, or did he say that he would not get us bogged down into more endless/long-term wars, occupations and nation-building?

I'll wait.
Click to expand...
you miss this part from the previous?

"And this year he denounced decades of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, decrying “Western interventionists” who had given other countries “lectures on how to live.”"

pretty sure that describes both situations.
 
#1,902
#1,902
LouderVol said:
you miss this part from the previous?

"And this year he denounced decades of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, decrying “Western interventionists” who had given other countries “lectures on how to live.”"

pretty sure that describes both situations.
Click to expand...
And you missed the part asking for the context of what aspects of the western intervention he was denouncing. That seems important. If he was denouncing any and all US military action, that seems important and easily proven. It's actually what's in question. Merely hand-waving about it won't suffice.



Orange_Crush said:
I've posted definitions that show that there are military activities that do not classify as war. Saying that we would "ideally" not have to use the military is not promising not to use it. Are two brief bombings the same as our "decades" of foreign policy? Specifically what about the decades of foreign policy was Trump castigating?

Was Trump promising not to get us entangled in endless foreign wars and the expense of nation-building? Or was he promising no military actions at all?

I'll wait.
Click to expand...
 
#1,903
#1,903
 
  • Like
Reactions: USF grad in TN and Good Ol' Charlie Brown
#1,904
#1,904
W.TN.Orange Blood said:
The big picture of ideas by President Trump on Venezuela is revealed here.
Its not drugs, but having control over China's big heavy thirst for oil.

4.5M views · 140K reactions | Everyone is debating President Trump’s move on Venezuela. But the real story isn’t drugs, terror, or oil for America. It’s energy leverage, China’s dependence, and the long game shaping global power. Watch the our News : https://www.youtube.com/@AltasWorldNews Read more global analysis: https://altasworldnews.com #AltasWorldNews #Geopolitics #Venezuela #Trump #China #Energy | Altas World News
Click to expand...

Okay. So, what are they (the rest of the world) suppose to build your widgets with and what do they do with their U.S. phony money?

Energy is a huge part of production.

9bf23d69d978be75a2ec99c2c700c297.gif
 
#1,907
#1,907
Since no one would take me up on the request to supply quotes to support the claim that Trump's campaign promised his supporters that there would be no military activity as part of his presidency, I decided to look for more myself. It sure sounds like he was promising just the opposite during the campaign and before being inaugurated--the potential or likelihood of military action against cartels.

It sounds like he was being very transparent before the election, before being inaugurated, and then having taken his second term.

Is it possible that I'm correct and he was saying "We will not get entangled in the costs pf endless foreign wars and nation-building with little benefit to the US like previous administrations have, but we will use every measure necessary to enforce American benefits and protections"?

He's pretty much shown that. Refused to get entangled in Ukraine for that stated reason, but put warheads on the foreheads of those hurting America.

Five things Donald Trump has said about Mexican cartels (Nov 14, 2024)

Trump has said that the border is "wide open" for criminal gangs and pledged to "wage war" on the cartels. He has also proposed sending troops into Mexico and invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to target and deport migrants involved with crime syndicates.
Click to expand...

"The drug cartels are waging war on America—and it's now time for America to wage war on the cartels," Trump said in a statement in 2023. "The drug cartels and their allies in the Biden administration have the blood of countless millions on their hands. Millions and millions of families and people are being destroyed. When I am back in the White House, the drug kingpins and vicious traffickers will never sleep soundly again."
Click to expand...

Speaking to supporters in Iowa in September 2023, Trump said, "Upon my inauguration, I will immediately terminate every open borders policy of the Biden administration.

"I'll make clear that we must use any and all resources needed to stop the invasion, including moving thousands of troops currently stationed overseas," Trump said at a rally in Dubuque.
Click to expand...

Trump's been many things, but coy is not one of those things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, Good Ol' Charlie Brown, InVOLuntary and 1 other person
#1,908
#1,908
Orange_Crush said:
Since no one would take me up on the request to supply quotes to support the claim that Trump's campaign promised his supporters that there would be no military activity as part of his presidency, I decided to look for more myself. It sure sounds like he was promising just the opposite during the campaign and before being inaugurated--the potential or likelihood of military action against cartels.

It sounds like he was being very transparent before the election, before being inaugurated, and then having taken his second term.

Is it possible that I'm correct and he was saying "We will not get entangled in the costs pf endless foreign wars and nation-building with little benefit to the US like previous administrations have, but we will use every measure necessary to enforce American benefits and protections"?

He's pretty much shown that. Refused to get entangled in Ukraine for that stated reason, but put warheads on the foreheads of those hurting America.

Five things Donald Trump has said about Mexican cartels (Nov 14, 2024)







Trump's been many things, but coy is not one of those things.
Click to expand...
He pushed European NATO countries to carry their own load and deal with Russia so he could focus on China and the western hemisphere.
 
#1,911
#1,911
Editorial against Trump's dangerous campaign rhetoric:

Although it is tempting to dismiss the increasingly militaristic rhetoric regarding drug cartels in Mexico as bluster, the posturing carries real risks. Even amid public fatigue with decades of “forever wars”, U.S. policymakers have not entirely shed the habit of looking at the use of force as a trump card to play when they face an otherwise intractable foreign policy challenge. The flow of drugs into the U.S. – in particular the potent synthetic opioid, fentanyl – has the hallmarks of such a challenge. Between 2016 and 2021, overdoses from the drug in the U.S. more than tripled. It is hard to know exactly how many people fentanyl has killed, because other drugs that have been laced with it can also cause death, but in 2022 alone, some 83,000 people in the U.S. died from opioid overdoses.
War talk will only serve to strain U.S.-Mexico ties.
Click to expand...

Against this backdrop, creating momentum behind the idea that the U.S. might use military force against criminal groups in Mexico, or even the Mexican state, is at best counterproductive and at worst genuinely dangerous.
Click to expand...


Funny. Lambast him for campaigning on the possibility to undermine support. When he does it, try to undermine support by claiming he lied to you about it.

Completely underhanded lying liars who know full well they are lying liars.
 
#1,914
#1,914
Hmmm... From October 2013:

In a campaign video published in January, Trump laid out his plan to crack down on the cartels, saying he would order the Pentagon to use “special forces, cyber warfare, and other overt and covert actions to inflict maximum damage on cartel leadership, infrastructure and operations” if needed to fight the cartels, which he also pledged to designate as foreign terrorist groups.

Trump also vowed to deploy “all necessary military assets,” including having the Navy impose a full embargo on cartels. He also outlined plans to cut off the cartels’ access to the global financial system and to ask Congress to ensure convicted drug traffickers can be eligible for the death penalty.
Click to expand...



He didn't just promise not to. He promises his supporters that he'd do it. He was castigated for promising to, but still got support. Now that he's done it, they are running a psy op to undermine support for it.
 
#1,915
#1,915
LSU-SIU said:
The way the orange man is running everything -- I doubt the U.S. will have to do anything to stop drugs. Nobody is going to do all that work for zero money.
Click to expand...
So you don't want to talk anymore about being an insulting ***hole on this subject while being completely wrong and (hopefully just) woefully uninformed?
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman
#1,916
#1,916
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#1,917
#1,917
Orange_Crush said:
So you don't want to talk anymore about being an insulting ***hole while being completely wrong and (hopefully just) woefully uninformed?
Click to expand...

You can get mad at me because you don't know war, acts of war and war powers are -- nobody is confused but you.

The orange man is going to make drug industry meaningless because they're won't be any money i.e. crash at this rate. He will get the blame, if that happens.
 
#1,918
#1,918
Yep, "America First" promises were just as we remembered and then restated here. It seems the facts were the actual heavy object that fell on our proverbial heads.



To Trump’s supporters, the proposals are part of a broader shift to an “America First” foreign policy that prioritizes protecting the homeland over involvement in foreign conflicts. They’re also a necessary step to combat illegal drug trafficking that has led to tens of thousands of American deaths.

“President Trump will prioritize — I think he will always put America first,” said Tom Homan, who served as acting director of Immigrations and Customs Enforcement during the last Trump administration and is now a fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank with ties to Trump. “It doesn’t mean you pull assets out of Ukraine or you pull assets out of other places in the world. I think we have plenty of assets go around, but if it requires a redeployment of assets to protect this country, then it absolutely needs to be done.”
Click to expand...

 
  • Like
Reactions: USF grad in TN
#1,919
#1,919
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen, EasternVol and NashVol11
#1,920
#1,920
LSU-SIU said:
You can get mad at me because you don't know war, acts of war and war powers are -- nobody is confused but you.
Click to expand...
I don't have to be angry to note and point out that someone is being very loudly and condescendingly wrong on a matter. My quotes this morning are showing that my recollection and statement of the "America First" promises were spot on. They were promises not to get us into endless wars with little benefit to America, and actual promises to use military actions when necessary for America's benefit.

You were wrong. You can admit it or continue being loudly and condescendingly wrong, which only becomes worse having been presented proof. It'll affect me little one way or another--much less than it affects and reveals you and the person you want to be.
 
#1,921
#1,921
Orange_Crush said:
I don't have to be angry to note and point out that someone is being very loudly and condescendingly wrong on a matter. My quotes this morning are showing that my recollection and statement of the "America First" promises were spot on. They were promises not to get us into endless wars with little benefit to America, and actual promises to use military actions when necessary for America's benefit.

You were wrong. You can admit it or continue being loudly and condescendingly wrong, which only becomes worse having been presented proof. It'll affect me little one way or another--much less than it affects and reveals you and the person you want to be.
Click to expand...

Most of this is obvious observation.

You were wrong.
Click to expand...

Nobody is wrong about anything, you are trying to run some strange PR scam.
 
#1,922
#1,922
Hmmm... Not only were supporters not lied to. They heard the truth and supported it. Imagine that...

U.S. presidential campaigns usually aren’t focused on foreign policy — which is actually a blessing because, when they are, the result is often crazy talk. If you doubt that, consider the latest policy idea that has been endorsed in some form or another by almost all the front-runners for the Republican presidential nomination: effectively declaring war on Mexico’s drug cartels. Donald Trump plans to “wage war” and impose a “full naval embargo” on them. Sen. Tim Scott (S.C.) says he wants to use “the world’s greatest military” to solve the problem. A recent poll found strong support for military action among GOP primary voters, so expect to see more such wild statements.
Click to expand...

 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman and USF grad in TN
#1,924
#1,924
LSU-SIU said:
Most of this is obvious observation.



Nobody is wrong about anything, you are trying to run some strange PR scam.
Click to expand...
This'll likely be my last reply to you on this, and so I'll use it to refresh the discussion history.

"Trump promised no wars. His stupid supporters believed him and now they're licking his boots to cheer it."

Me: "Did he promise no endless wars and nation building, but allow the possibility of smaller military engagements for America's benefit? That's what I remember "America First" to be about."

"Nope. He promised no more wars."

Me: "Was he using the restrictive definition of 'war' that you're imposing? Here's some of the literal definitions of 'war', and none of them restrict the use of smaller. shorter engagements against weaker/smaller foes. That's what I've seen that he's done. Can you post some quotes that would support the restrictive definition you're enforcing on him? I literally don't remember it the way you are painting it."

You: <Insult your intelligence and infer that you have brain damage.>

"These are the definitions again. Can you support the restricted definitions you're demanding?"

You: "Your reference to the definitions of war is a semantic game. I'll use an illustration to infer that you need to use the definition of words."

...

Here are the receipts that actually prove I was right all along. How do you want to handle it now?

You: <Insult your integrity and double down.>


This should be enough to prove once and for all how beneath conversational attention you have been in this. Have a nice day.
 
#1,925
#1,925
Orange_Crush said:
This'll likely be my last reply to you on this, and so I'll use it to refresh the discussion history.

"Trump promised no wars. His stupid supporters believed him and now they're licking his boots to cheer it."

Me: "Did he promise no endless wars and nation building, but allow the possibility of smaller military engagements for America's benefit? That's what I remember "America First" to be about."

"Nope. He promised no more wars."

Me: "Was he using the restrictive definition of 'war' that you're imposing? Here's some of the literal definitions of 'war', and none of them restrict the use of smaller. shorter engagements against weaker/smaller foes. That's what I've seen that he's done. Can you post some quotes that would support the restrictive definition you're enforcing on him? I literally don't remember it the way you are painting it."

You: <Insult your intelligence and infer that you have brain damage.>

"These are the definitions again. Can you support the restricted definitions you're demanding?"

You: "Your reference to the definitions of war is a semantic game. I'll use an illustration to infer that you need to use the definition of words."

...

Here are the receipts that actually prove I was right all along. How do you want to handle it now?

You: <Insult your integrity and double down.>


This should be enough to prove once and for all how beneath conversational attention you have been in this. Have a nice day.
Click to expand...

Nobody is reading all that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandman 423
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top