Maybe We’ll Invade Another Oil-Rich Politically Dysfunctional Sort of Socialist Country. What Could Go Wrong?

The Trump Administration is considering invading Venezuela. Please don’t say here we go again…

9 thoughts on “Maybe We’ll Invade Another Oil-Rich Politically Dysfunctional Sort of Socialist Country. What Could Go Wrong?

  1. Trump certainly invited the necons back into the tent to piss out rather than to remain standing outside pissing in.

    Any Trump appointee is likely to get fired for the fun of it, unless rich and/or connected to the family. It remains to be seen whether Bolton is going to get fired The Apprentice style for refusing to dye his mustache orange or Doctor Strangelove style, taking thousands of lives with him.

  2. Corrupt … check
    Authoritarian … check
    Vaguely Socialist …. meh, “Welfare State,” close enough
    Economy a mess … check
    Got oil … check.
    WMDs … check
    Terrorists … check

    It all makes sense! We’ve already got the military bases, personnel, and equipment in place. Invading the US be a great cost savings.

    We’ll welcome us as liberators!

  3. The USA does PERPETUAL war.

    The generic “dictionary (dot) com” defines “perpetual” as “continuing or continued without intermission or interruption; ceaseless.”

    Therefore the notion of “here we go AGAIN” is meaningless with regard to US warmongering. The only “again,” in this context, is that the media is “again” covering one, of many, areas of US war-making. The vast majority of US military involvement, in roughly 2/3 of the “sovereign” nations of the world, is never mentioned. In a rare concession, it may not be ALL the fault of the media as the fourth branch of the government, the Pentagon, often operates in total secrecy.

    Re sanctions: at this point it seems it is easier to name those countries NOT under US sanctions than those which are. (At one time sanctions, of the sort by which the US plagues societies across the globe, were quaintly considered war crimes.)

    • Perhaps, falco, my understanding of the adverb «again» differs from yours, but in my idiolect one doesn’t have to cease from an activity in order to do it again, rather, as per this definition ; rather, one can simply add yet another instance to those in which one is currently engaged, i e, the seven «official wars» – in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Niger, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen respectively, in which the US military was participating in March last year, according to the Report on the legal and policy framework guiding the united States’ use of military force and related national security operations (I’d leave a link, but as we know, Ted’s site is a tad hostile to multiple links) then released (not counting the unofficial ones, such as activity in Iran’s Sistan and Baluchistan, in which strange explosions take place from time to time….

      The more the merrier, as they (presumably) say at the Pentagon !…

      Henri

      • Hi Henri,

        Consider my assumption about the meaning of “again” merely an invocation of “ranter’s license,” as it were, to make a point … and here’s another rant/point

        The “again” of Venezuela has been going on for about two decades. That is, essentially from the moment of the appearance (in the US’s hemisphere, no less!!!) of the menacing specter of, and ensuing, paralyzing terror over, the insidious idea of the essential worth of the OTHER 99.99% of a nation’s population.

        The first anti-Chavez coupe attempt against Venezuela by George “the profoundly impaired” Bush (II) was in April 2002 and thus is preceded only by Afghanistan among the countries on your long, and we must assume, incomplete, list of societies under publicly acknowledged siege by the exceptionally brutal USA.

        If you reply on issues of grammar or a better moniker for Bush II (or one for Cheney, for that matter), include the link to the “Report on the legal and policy framework guiding the united States’ use of military force and related national security operations.”

      • «If you reply on issues of grammar or a better moniker for Bush II (or one for Cheney, for that matter), include the link to the “Report on the legal and policy framework guiding the united States’ use of military force and related national security operations.”» Alas, falco, I find myself unable to be of much help on the first two requests, but I should be able to fix the third….

        Henri

      • Thanks, Henri.

        You might be interested in the US military’s
        “AfriCom” site.

        I came across it while unsuccessfully trying to relocate a recent story on the way congress only found out about US military involvement in FOURTEEN African countries through appropriation refunding requests.

        I think the “Area of Responsibility” link nicely spells out the attitude and situation. I count 48 of apparent 54 countries of the continent.

      • «I think the “Area of Responsibility” link nicely spells out the attitude and situation. I count 48 of apparent 54 countries of the continent.» Surely just a minor misunderstanding, falco ; all men (and surely some women) of good will know that it is those dastardly Chinese who are colonising the continent…. 😉

        Henri

Leave a Reply