This is where I’m at. What’s happened to Venezuela is tragic, but it does not merit military intervention by us.
I doubt anyone is making a bid for the whole shebang. We oughta give it a try.
Probably not. Their oil is terrible stuff that requires specialized refineries to refine, which are mostly in the US. And with the advent of fracking US refineries are being re-tooled to use the superior oil extracted by it. In the “next few years” there likely won’t be much of anyone left who can either refine their oil or will want it.
I don’t understand this. Shouldn’t we be trying to prevent suffering of whole peoples if we can?
The point is, often we can’t, and in fact, make it worse.
That’s seems indicative of a poor plan and/or execution of that plan, and not a poor intention.
Law and order is good for business. Business is good for the GDP.
Human suffering is bad. Law and order reduces human suffering.
So, by my count, policing the planet makes the world better and is is profitable. I’m not aware of any real argument against it that isn’t based on false assumptions and/or dogmatic indoctrination by people with those false assumptions.
We’ve got plenty of people suffering in the United States, sure, it’s not as bad as Venezuela but I’ve never understood this mentality of trying to fix other countries when we can’t even take care of our own backyard. Our government should be worried about its own people.
I’ve reached middle age and all my idealism has been replaced by cynicism.
I thought the USA could bring democracy and prosperity to Iraq and Afghanistan. But it didn’t work out. It was a combination of we didn’t do it right, and they didn’t really want it.
All of us have people in their lives that refuse to accept common sense advice to make their lives better. We bail them out. We console them. We offer all the support that anyone could ask for. Nothing changes because they don’t want to change. Venezuela is no different just bigger in scope. Only they can fix their problems.
American soldiers dying to prevent the suffering of their fellow citizens is one thing; asking them to die for another country’s citizens is, well, another.
Maduro needs to go, but I don’t know how the US could be a constructive force in that nation.
Economic and political pressure from most nations in North & south America could help pressure Maduro and his regime to step down.
I don’t think my assessment here is based on ‘dogmatic indoctrination’ or ‘false assumptions’. The Venezuelans government has spent, literally, decades indoctrinating THEIR people with the idea that all their woes are America’s fault. While I’m sure that, at some level, the people realize that their government lies, at a certain point the Big Lie becomes reality. If the US tried any sort of intervention, the effect would be to unite the various factions to oppose us. Not only that, but it would also galvanize the entire region against us. And this, at a time when the entire region has destabilized. The US can’t…CAN NOT…intervene successfully in this region at this time. We don’t have the ability to do so without strong regional allies and tons of international support, as there is already a humanitarian crisis happening, and not just in Venezuela. We will get neither, not regionally, not internationally. In fact, we’ll be condemned by everyone, regionally and internationally, and China and Russia especially will oppose any such intervention. Hell, it might trigger a war, a real war, simply because of the forces currently in motion. China, especially, has a huge vested stake in this…it’s why even the opposition in Venezuela has said that, regardless of what happens, China will get theirs.
The US can’t act alone in this, and essentially that’s exactly what we’d be doing. The UN wouldn’t support us. Our European allies wouldn’t support us. Our regional allies, such as they are, would definitely not support us. And those opposed to us would oppose us big time. This isn’t ‘dogmatic indoctrination by people with those false assumptions’, it’s reality.
Policing the world doesn’t have to mean:
a) Doing it in a straightforward manner.
b) Doing it alone.
c) Being the primary actor in each situation.
It’s simply indicative of reality.
What would be your plan for Venezuela? Let’s hear a workable one.
Nothing.
It is not our job to intervene in every nation that decides to lose it’s sanity, kill tens of thousands of people in the process, damage their infrastructure, get hundreds of Americans killed and make them angry at us instead.
And throw tens or hundreds of billions of dollars at defense industries in the process, adding to our deficit.
Tell that to the Moon, Bi-otch! 
:Takes a gander, in no particular order, neither regarding material or human cost, nor long term effects or amount of atrocities, at Cuba, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Mexico (ongoing), Colombia, Chile, Argentina, Panama, Turkey, Iran (several times), Iraqx3, Syria, Pakistan, Saudi-Arabia, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, both countries in Hispaniola, Korea, Bolivia, Zaire, South Africa, Libya, Somalia, The Balkans, Sudan, Afghanistan, Yemen, Indonesia, Greece, Philippines, Egypt, Congo:
:Shakes head at geocentric, jingoistic world view:
It almost feels as if it’s easier to find countries where the U.S. hasn’t interfered, in one way or another, since '45.
Well, I could secure their networks, since, you know, that’s my profession.
I’m sure others, with a profession closer to “nation-building” or “international diplomacy” would be better able to answer your question.
Yep, and there aint nothing like that happening here, nosiree.
Could you explain why you thought that?