44 pointsby belter12 hours ago10 comments
  • chasil12 hours ago
    I do not understand what is motivating this conflict.

    Most of the fentanyl and other contraband is coming from the pacific side, where no action has been taken (other than an attempt to reobtain a U.S. military base in Ecuador).

    There must be more to justify this, but the reasoning is opaque.

    • comfysocks11 hours ago
      Venezuela has the world’s largest proven oil reserves. Larger than Saudi Arabia and the US, yet produces very little of it.

      https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/05/business/energy-environme...

      Squeeze Ukraine for rare earths and Venezuela for oil. Neither has nukes, easy targets. Give lucrative contracts to mining and extraction buddies, give pardons to financial criminals, get protection from powerful new allies after you leave office.

      • mamonster10 hours ago
        >Squeeze Ukraine for rare earths

        Ukrainian rare earths are a massive meme. The only argument that is reasonable is that post-war Ukraine will have below 0 environmental protections and accept Congo-style mining.

        If it was not economical enough for USSR, it won't be for any actor that knows what ROI is.

        A much better economic future for Ukraine as part of Europe would be to make it the breadbasket of the entire EU but it's political suicide given the farmer protests.

    • phantasmish12 hours ago
      The generous assignment of motivation is realpolitik anti-Russia + China stuff.

      Less generous but probably true as at least part of the motivation, there’s the usual factor of US companies wanting to “invest” in a foreign country to extract natural resources.

      One may guess at other, more-personal motivations for parties involved.

      It, transparently, has dick-all to do with drugs.

      [edit] ok technically the drug connection is the admin continuing to use that as an obviously-bullshit excuse to use powers they couldn’t ordinarily, and daring the courts to do anything about it. Same as justifying using emergency tariff powers against Canada over fentanyl. They’re counting on the courts to abdicate their power and responsibility to call bullshit on the admin’s lies when it comes to application of existing laws.

      • echelon11 hours ago
        The DoD, which outlives any presidential term, is preparing for multipolarity. It wants to maintain power over the Western hemisphere while continuing to mind after its interests in Asia and Europe as best as it can. If America can maintain hegemony in the whole of the Western hemisphere, it's largely shielded from whatever happens in Asia, especially if future administrations continue to double down on isolationism.

        Venezuela and even the posturing on Greenland are the DoD war gaming out a firewall from Chinese and Russian influence. They want to stop South American trade with our rivals, and especially prevent basing of foreign troops.

        Greenland becomes a strategic part of this once global warming opens the North Sea to large volumes of shipping. It will become the major shipping corridor, and America wants complete control over it.

        Not to mention all of the oil and gas exploration both of these countries provide.

        Trump isn't thinking 30 years ahead. This is the DoD through and through. They think in terms of decades and centuries.

    • Pet_Ant12 hours ago
      I suspect that the United States are trying to assert their dominance over the entirety of the Americas (both north and south). Hence this, the talk of fentanyl from Canada, Canada the 51st state, and annexing Greenland. See Orwell's 1984's Oceania, though without Australia, but add Taiwan (to check Eastasia).

      I think the passivity towards Ukraine is part of relinquishing as seeing Europe as partners or seeing them as part of strategic value. Russia can take Europe, or Europe can fight back, they are good either way.

      Because of Maduro and the cocaine, Venezuela is an easy first step. They are both hard to stand up for except in principle. I would not be surprised if Cuba is round two. It's the Truman doctrine on steroids.

      I even wonder if the idea is to replace cheap Chinese labour with each South American labor eventually.

      • belter11 hours ago
        I am sure Brazil already secretly restarted its Nuclear Weapons program: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazil_and_weapons_of_mass_des...
      • tharmas11 hours ago
        Yes its Monroe doctrine 2.0 but its also Rubio et al wants Maduro gone. Maduro offered almost everything to the Trump admin except one thing: abdicating. Maduro was even willing to concede on that but wanted to choose a successor and have a transition period. But the Trump admin turned even that down. The Trump admin wants Maduro gone right away. Period.

        Yes, Cuba is next.

    • rjsw12 hours ago
      There have been statements that Venezuela "stole US oil" as justification for it. The oil in question is under Venezuela.

      Looks like a resumption of the Banana Wars [1] to me.

      [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_Wars

    • shimman12 hours ago
      The reasoning is simple, Marc Rubio holds a grudge against the anti-conservative forces throughout South America. This likely grudge comes from his parents and Miami Cuban conservative community (they are all big on South American regime change). It also happens to coincide that oil corporations want to sell more of the oil on the global market.

      If you want to learn more about the why, I suggest the book "Gangsters of Capitalism" by Jonathan M. Katz it's about the military exploits of Smedley Butler and how they helped American imperialism.

      • rjsw11 hours ago
        There is Butler's own book "War is a Racket" [1] too.

        [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Is_a_Racket

        • shimman5 hours ago
          Yes! But after reading the two I'd honestly recommend gangsters of capitalism as it explains how his exploits directly benefited American corporate imperialism.
      • andsoitis12 hours ago
        > holds a grudge against the anti-conservative forces

        Maduro, the president of Venezuela, is a dictator - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolás_Maduro#Dictatorship_ch...

        • tharmas11 hours ago
          You should look into the history of Venezuelan oil. Then you will understand why Chavez nationalized it. The Americans never forgave him for that.

          > Maduro, the president of Venezuela, is a dictator

          Saudi Arabia? The Saudi ruling elite and the USA are best buddies.

          • andsoitis11 hours ago
            I'm not saying that there aren't dictators that the US does business with.

            What I am pushing back against is that it is simply a "grudge against anti-conservatives".

            • piva0010 hours ago
              Maduro is a left-wing dictator though, not the right kind of despot for the Trump administration. It's a grudge against anything socialist/communist-adjacent.

              Rubio is a warhawk, hoping it all backfires in this administration's face. Unfortunately now we all have to resign ourselves on living in a more unstable world, the multipolar world order Putin wants so much is in flux...

            • tharmas11 hours ago
              Fair enough. It is Rubio who is the driving force behind this. Rubio et al are very anti-communist/socialist ideologically. Maduro offered everything basically to Trump except removing himself from power, which is what this "war" is really all about: removing Maduro.
              • andsoitis11 hours ago
                > Rubio et al are very anti-communist/socialist ideologically.

                The EU has condemned Maduro's attacks on democracy and human rights and imposed sanctions related to repression and democratic rollback. However, the EU has not endorsed the US military action. The European Parliament has urged tougher stances (including potentially terrorism designations, like the US has done) but has not become EU policy.

    • hypeatei11 hours ago
      Some of it probably has to do with Venezuela nationalizing its natural gas industry in the 70s after American companies had already invested money there. I don't think Trump personally cares that much, but there are neo-con factions (Rubio, etc..) in his ear telling him that something needs to be done to make this right.

      Using the fentanyl crisis as a scapegoat is truly lame, especially when you blow up flimsy boats carrying cocaine and double-tap them to make sure they're dead. Most peaceful president, you wouldn't even believe.

    • mapt11 hours ago
      You're just not following every statement, and assuming logical continuity. Like a sane (if naive) person.

      Trump started out with nonsensical accusations that were clearly thinly veiled regime change plans. Declaring the cartel a terrorist organization, declaring drugs to be de jure military violence worthy of assassination, and declaring the President "Leader of the cartel".

      Recently Trump admitted (as he proudly does) that this was all lies. Kayfabe. We started seizing oil tankers, and he put out on Truth Social Tuesday December 16th (it could literally be a thousand posts ago, he hasn't been sleeping), that this was a total blockade, that it was about regime change, and retaking what was ours, and that Maduro had better surrender the oil & oil infrastructure. You could interpret this as a reference to the 1976 nationalization of the oil industry, or the 1990's and 2000's... friction... with the American oil primes, but it's pretty clear Trump is a giant ball of imperialist revanchism that doesn't particularly care about the facts.

      > “Venezuela is completely surrounded by the largest Armada ever assembled in the History of South America,” Trump posted on Truth Social. “It will only get bigger, and the shock to them will be like nothing they have ever seen before — Until such time as they return to the United States of America all of the Oil, Land, and other Assets that they previously stole from us.”

      Donald Trump, December 16th

      • AnimalMuppet11 hours ago
        "Completely surrounded"? Maybe someone should look at a map of South America.
        • LargoLasskhyfv8 hours ago
          Yes? It will show Venezuelas coast is to the north only. Relatively easy to control from a base in Puerto Rico. Which is already happening, as several mainstream media have shown, regarding troop movements and build-up there.
    • beAbU9 hours ago
      It's oil. Come now. We've been through this. If the reason is opaque, it's oil. If the reason is clearly stated, it's oil. Even if the reason is not oil, it's still oil.
    • fabian2k12 hours ago
      I think it is even more important now to look at the individual people making these decisions instead of looking at the country. The interests of the US don't matter in this administration, the interests of the people in charge drive this.

      And even then I wouldn't look too deep. Maybe Trump just wants to blow stuff up, to show he's strong. Odds are, some people nudging him have their own reasons for encouraging this.

    • krona11 hours ago
      Page 5 of the National Security Strategy:

      We want to ensure that the Western Hemisphere remains reasonably stable and well-governed enough to prevent and discourage mass migration to the United States; we want a Hemisphere whose governments cooperate with us against narco-terrorists, cartels, and other transnational criminal organizations; we want a Hemisphere that remains free of hostile foreign incursion or ownership of key assets, and that supports critical supply chains; and we want to ensure our continued access to key strategic locations. In other words, we will assert and enforce a “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine;

      Sounds pretty transparent to me, especially when you begin to consider who has been investing in Venezuelan energy infrastructure recently.

    • tchalla12 hours ago
      Oil and power.
    • itsthecourier12 hours ago
      America will profit from the resources it get back in compensation. Removing a dictator who is building a advance post of Iranian, Chinese and Russian forces is great too. Finally if you want to reduce drastically the amount of latin american immigration, it's easier to help them recover democracy instead of send them back and receiving them again, back and forth indefinitely
      • echelon12 hours ago
        This is the reason. This is probably DoD-instigated, not Trump's idea. We'd likely see this same policy under other leadership, especially if it were Republican.

        The posturing on Greenland is also coming out of the DoD. The Trump admin isn't thinking thirty years ahead for when the North Sea becomes a primary transit corridor.

        This is all internal war gaming.

    • lossolo10 hours ago
      > I do not understand what is motivating this conflict.

      Money/resources, and power/control/influence.

      It's the same with fentanyl as it was with weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Your government is selling you and the world justifications. It's as old as the world, you need a casus belli. The Crusades, for example, were mostly just resource and land grabs etc.

    • belter11 hours ago
      It is an old objective:

      [1] - "...According to the Associated Press, within the framework of the crisis in Venezuela, unnamed administration officials stated that an intervention was raised in 2017 to Donald Trump's advisors, including US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and national security advisor H. R. McMaster (who left the Trump administration from that moment on) and later to several presidents of Latin American countries including Juan Manuel Santos.[1] Gustavo Petro, president of Colombia, declared in May 2023 that Trump had made a proposal to then-president Iván Duque to invade Venezuela through Colombia, but that his advisors had stopped him..."

      [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_United_States_invasio...

    • alecco12 hours ago
      US government feels threatened by the advance of Chinese and Russian influence in Latin America. And they seem to have decided to let go of their interests in Europe.
  • DivingForGold11 hours ago
    Very significant (massive) oil reserves have been discovered offshore Guyana as early as 2008 by Exxon Mobil and of course Guyana borders Venezuela, accordingly Maduro has been sword rattling claiming territorial disputes threatening to take back Guyana. Exxon Mobil is drilling successfully now and the Guyanian economy is booming. Typically wherever US interests are threatened in the world, the military intervenes.
    • fernandopj3 hours ago
      Exactly. As long as Guiana is happy doing multinational business with US-allied companies, they're active participants in USA trade hegemony and that is sufficient.

      Venezuela is not. They're heavily sanctioned by the USA and have to do their petrol business elsewhere - also not using US dollars as exchange currency. POTUS made clear this situation will not continue as is.

    • 171862744010 hours ago
      Isn't Guyana French?
      • phantasmish10 hours ago
        The Guyana that borders Venezuela is independent, but ex-British. French Guyana is on the other end of that set of three little countries.
      • d3rockk8 hours ago
        So there's French Guiana, and then Guyana. Both are part of the Guianas (or Guyanas/Guayanas).

        The "Guiana" region (land of waters), was home to the Arawak and Carib peoples, and then there was a colonial scramble between the Dutch, English and French over the last half millennia-- each respectively took over some portion and then slapped their names on it.

        Guyana is independently english speaking because they were colonized by the British- centuries ago it used to go by British Guiana.

        French Guiana is basically an overseas department of France.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guianas

      • 10 hours ago
        undefined
  • m4r1k12 hours ago
    The Peace President is about to bring war on Venezuela and destabilize the country (and probably with far reaching consequences in the region). Who would have thought?
    • amanaplanacanal12 hours ago
      Yeah. The "peace president" has so far attacked four countries in his first year in office.
      • treetalker11 hours ago
        Many soccer associations are saying — what a stupid name, soccer, you know everybody else calls it football, the NFL has been mean, we should really do something about that, can we do something about that?, let's get some people on that to change the name of football to something else and then soccer to football — they're saying, and these are some of the best soccer associations, the real best, FIFA in fact, it's saying we got the FIFA peace prize, and you know it was the first one, because I'm the president of peace, some say the most peaceable president, and the radical left hates it, but Venezuela you say?, I can't say I've heard of it, but the people who deal with those things, they tell me, and they're very smart, the greatest, some say, they say that this just has to be done, so we're doing that, and did you know they stole our oil?, stole it a long time ago, and it's ours, it really is, they tell me, but I haven't heard about this strike yet, if it's important I'm sure its reach my desk, it's a beautiful wood desk
        • focusedone11 hours ago
          I'm not sure if this is a direct quote or a creatively written one but I'm afraid to find out.
    • jacknews12 hours ago
      And far beyond the region
    • 0xy12 hours ago
      Venezuela is not a stable country. There is active famine. You can easily make an argument against the war, but to suggest it's a stable country is false.
      • tharmas11 hours ago
        That's part of the USA's plan, in the hopes that the people will turn on Maduro and oust him so the USA doesn't have to do it.

        But how did that strategy work out in Libya? Its an absolute mess. Now its a conduit for African migration into Europe. Who knows what destabilizing Venezuela will do.

        • LargoLasskhyfv7 hours ago
          > Who knows what destabilizing Venezuela will do?

          Not much, if one plays 'area denial' games with the Darién Gap, by mining it?

      • jacknews12 hours ago
        It's a war now?
  • amanaplanacanal12 hours ago
    If this really happened two nights ago, you would think there would be some news from inside Venezuela about it.
  • Eddy_Viscosity25 hours ago
    Aren't these acts of war? Doesn't congress need to authorize this?
  • stuffn11 hours ago
    It is entirely too clear absolutely no one on this god forsaken website understands the government. Trump doesn't wage war. This is a DoD action, owned by the DoD, developed by the DoD, for the purpose the DoD cares about. What would the DoD care about?

    1. Resources in Venezuela coming under control of Russia and/or China

    2. Controlling a completely unstable country to build influence in latin America

    3. Styming a port of entry for drugs like Fentanyl that, in reality, are coming from China

    4. Preventing China/Russia from dropping mid-range missiles and military installations remotely close to the US

    The mass media has absolutely lobotomized people.

    • tim3334 hours ago
      Trump probably has some influence on the DoD, including stopping it being the DoD. It is now the department of war apparently.
    • bigyabai11 hours ago
      Why would an America First administration invest in this kind of transient interventionism? What if it turns into 1953 Iran all over again?
      • stuffn10 hours ago
        I don't think realistically isolationism implies inaction. Let's suppose that it's the most "honest" cause. That is, attempting to prevent a Cuban Missile Crisis event by putting boots on the ground early. Then this doesn't contradict isolationism. In fact, I'd argue it's probably entirely within the bounds of "America First".

        However, your point stands. Venezuela stands to benefit from an invasion because the country is unstable and teetering on collapse. It's essentially being sold to the highest bidder. If Russia/China want to put their boots there they will need to defend it and rebuild it. If the US wants to prevent Russia/China from doing that they will need to defend it and rebuild it. The US has far better global power projection and will likely spend considerable resources to ensure it's success as it's also, in some sense, a survival concern for the CONUS itself. I would think it could look a lot 1953 Iran, with the exception that power projection "down the street" (so to speak) is much easier to maintain than across the ocean.

  • jacknews12 hours ago
    [flagged]
    • 12 hours ago
      undefined
  • itsthecourier12 hours ago
    as much as I oppose many of Trump policies, I believe this one will benefit positively the continent and ensure the latin vote in the next presidencial elections
    • drcongo11 hours ago
      Yes. That worked brilliantly in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Korea, Chile etc.
      • tharmas11 hours ago
        And Libya too!
        • drcongo11 hours ago
          Actually, has it ever worked?
  • amelius12 hours ago
    It must suck to work for the US military during this administration.