this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2025
123 points (97.7% liked)

World News

50548 readers
2430 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

But today, the sheer scale of the US military build-up does not align with the idea of a cynical political stunt, nor does Trump’s decision to cut off all diplomatic backchannels with the Venezuelan government and deauthorise special envoy Rick Grenell’s outreach to Maduro. The more we look at the military deployment and the increasingly belligerent rhetoric from Trump officials, the more the pursuit of regime change through military means appears to be the most plausible explanation...

We also shouldn’t be surprised if, when the first attack fails to produce the promised uprising, regime-change advocates demand another strike, then another. Convinced the government is on its last legs and needs just one more push, they would likely pressure Trump to keep bombing, and perhaps even support the formation of some form of armed opposition, currently nonexistent in Venezuela.

Such a Libya-style proxy war would flood an already volatile region with more weapons and money. Criminal organizations and irregular armed groups already operating on Venezuela’s western border — and beyond, in neighboring Colombia — would thrive in the chaos, swelling their ranks and profiting from arms and human trafficking: a nightmare scenario for Latin America.

During the last few years of draconian US sanctions on Venezuela — which have significantly contributed to shortages of food, medicine and fuel — more than seven million Venezuelans have fled their country. This unprecedented wave of migration has had profound repercussions across the region and beyond, including in the US, where it has influenced the 2024 elections in Trump’s favor. If US sanctions produced such an exodus, we can only imagine the scale of the refugee crisis that would result from an actual war. It is no surprise that Brazil and Colombia, Venezuela’s most strategic neighbors from the point of view of any potential conflict, have strongly opposed a US military intervention.

The bitter irony is inescapable: an operation justified by anti-narcotics rhetoric would create ideal conditions for drug-trafficking organizations to expand their power. The military build-up off Venezuela’s coast is a slippery slope towards an armed conflagration that could lead to far greater suffering for the Venezuelan people, a potential political quagmire for the United States, US troop casualties and the catastrophic destabilization of much of the region.

all 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] cecilkorik@piefed.ca 13 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Here's the quick checklist of reasons the US needs to invade a country:

  • Does it have oil?
  • Does it have terrorists?

If you answered "Yes" to any of the above questions, your country can be invaded.

[–] huquad@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm not convinced the second is true. Always seems to be resource based. Many places the US hasn't helped because there's not a financial incentive (see Africa for examples).

[–] SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Note how "terrorist" is often applied to those resistant to resource/land based occupation/exploitation.

[–] huquad@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago

Well yeah, they're striking terror into the shareholders. Won't anyone think of the shareholders?

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago
  • Does it have a single socialist policy?
  • Is it primarily black or brown?
[–] FluidBeef@quokk.au 1 points 1 day ago

Working for the black gas.

Shocked I'm shocked I tell you.

[–] Sundiata@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

We should have invaded and regime changed russia, or bunker busted the shit out of putin.

not like this.

not like this

[–] icelimit@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I thought it was there to invade Panama?

[–] 1985MustangCobra@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

O I forgot about that, wonder if that's on the table.