Saturday, August 12, 2017

President Trump Does Not Rule Out Military Options On Venezuela



Wall Street Journal: Trump Won’t Rule Out Military Option for Venezuela

‘Venezuela is a mess,’ president says.

President Donald Trump warned of possible military action in Venezuela on Friday, even as he amplified threats of an armed response to North Korea missile buildup.

Mr. Trump said a military option is possible in Venezuela, though he provided few details, while the president also stepped up his warnings to North Korean leader Kim Jong Un as he spoke at a press conference at his golf course in Bedminster, N.J., on Friday.

“I’m not going to rule out a military option,” Mr. Trump told reporters when asked about the situation in the South American country. “Venezuela is a mess.”

“We have many options for Venezuela, including a possible military option if necessary,” he said.

The remarks came a day after President Nicolás Maduro said in a speech to the newly formed constituent assembly that he wanted to speak with Mr. Trump by phone or meet him when he visits the U.S. next month for the United Nations General Assembly. “If he is so interested in Venezuela, here I am,” Mr. Maduro said Thursday. “Mr. Donald Trump, here is my hand.”

Read more ....

WNU Editor: President Trump was elected on a platform to not intervene in other countries. In the case of Venezuela .... I am not surprised that there are military options, but any U.S. intervention in that country would then mean that the U.S. would be responsible for fixing it .... and considering the monies and resources involved .... an unbelievably stupid option to pursue right now. But in the end .... Venezuela is a country that is on the brink of becoming a failed state that will impact the entire Americas. A political solution will have to be devised (and probably imposed) .... whether strongmen like Venezuelan President Maduro agrees to it or not. But until then .... whether we like it or not .... this crisis will have to run its course.

More News On President Trump Not Ruling Out Military Options On Venezuela

Trump Alarms Venezuela With Talk of a ‘Military Option’ -- NYT
Trump: I won´t rule out military action against Venezuela -- Daily Mail/Press Association
Trump does not rule out military response to Venezuela crisis -- BBC
Trump says he won't 'rule out a military option' in Venezuela -- ABC News
Trump refuses to take call from Venezuela’s Maduro -- Washington Times
Latin America to slam Trump's 'military option' threat -- Reuters
GOP senator: Congress 'obviously' not authorizing war in Venezuela -- The Hill

16 comments:

B.Poster said...

"Trump was elected to not intervene in other countries..." You could actually stop right there. With that said we could add that the United States already has enormous commitments elsewhere. Many of these need to be scaled back. This is not the time to add new ones.

I would add the US's record for "fixing" countries is relatively poor. As for breaking something, the US and its military are quite adept at that right now. As you state, this would be an unbelievably stupid option to pursue right now.

The best we can probably do is to cut ties with Venezuela, "wall it off" much like the human body tries to do when the immune system encounters an infection or growth it is unable to handle, limit migration from Venezuela, and further develop our own oil and gas reserves. This way we can hopefully confine the problem to Venezuela without it spreading and allow the Venezuelans the space they need to solve their own problems.

Aizino Smith said...

Venezuela cannot be walled off.

It has threatened its neighbor to the east, Guyana. Venezuela needs the cash and so is willing to steal oil from Guyana by force.

Between Ecuador and Venezuela, they can give Columbia the fits, like they have been doing for a generation.

Cuba has provided intel & state security services. They may provide soldiers like they did in Africa.

If Cuba makes enough headway, Nicaragua might feel brave enough to enter the fray.

Iran is there to see that Venezuela does not get walled off. There are direct flights form Caracas to Tehran. Iran will not willingly give up its base at Margarita island.

How will Raul, the Cuban generals and the Cuban oligarchs make money without the cocaine from Venezuela?

B.Poster said...

Aizino,

You are probably right. Venezuela probably cannot be walled off. We cannot take military action there either as we have to many commitments already and don't have the force structure to be able to do so. Frankly, at this point, I'm not sure what options we actually have here.

Aizino Smith said...

So the 'CPA' knows about force structure and is an arm chair general to boot?

Britain did not have the force structure in 1939 or 1940.

Germany did not have the force structure in 1939. The generals said it would be another 10 or 15 years.

Yet the clash came anyway.

"You are probably right. Venezuela probably cannot be walled off"
So you conceded the point and retreated to a fallback position from whence you were routed.

B.Poster said...

Aizino,

I stated you are probably right and admittedly there do not seem to be any good options at this point.

While I do admit to not fully understanding force structure nor am I an armchair general as a CPA who works with a wide variety of business clients, I do understand resources be they financial or otherwise and the limitations of them. I also understand debt and how it can act to minimize one's opportunities and about how it is unsustainable. Additionally, as resources are spent or used in one area, they are not available elsewhere. America needs major upgrades to its infrastructure.

The comments from the editor in his 'WNU Editor' comment pretty much sum up the situation. Given America's incredibly poor track record at "fixing" things in other countries and our commitments elsewhere, we are in no position to be able to devise or impose a political solution for this problem.

Very respectfully I a not sure that the analogies of 1939 and 1940 apply here. This situation is much different. As such, it will require different strategies to deal with and hopefully solve. A "solution" will be up to the Venezuelans.

Aaron Bass said...

Taking control of Venezuela would go far to show the world that Russian support for them has failed miserably. Same for Cuba.
The smart money left Venezuela years ago and all that are left are poor and needy with no where to turn except the government. And they have to borrow an ink pen to write a letter. And most likely the paper too.
I would like to see the USA use this opportunity to unite all of South America under a central government much the same as USA. With a United South America we can let the rest of the world do as they please forever. And if we don't? The Chinese and Russians will move in.

Aizino Smith said...

Aaron,

"The smart money left Venezuela years ago "

Many socialist have looted the country and left also.

So it is the back bench socialist running the country.

How Venezuela’s corrupt socialists are looting the country to death

Aizino Smith said...

"I stated you are probably right and admittedly there do not seem to be any good options at this point" - A++ Poster

"As you know, you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time." -DONALD RUMSFELD

That was true in 1939/1940 and it is true now.

Do you what Margarita Island is?

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

Unfortunately, you probably do.

B.Poster said...

Aizino,

I will look up Margarita Island. Thank you for the link. I think I do remember Donald Rumsfeld's statement. The second Iraq War was a giant mess from the start. Actually I could use something more colorful to describe the mess it was/still is.

The army we had in this situation was not adequate for the mission that it ended up having to carry out. Perhaps we should have done something else besides I'm not totally convinced that we weren't mislead into that particular war.

Time permitting I will post more on the similarities and differences between now and 1939/1940. It's generally a pleasure discussing this with you.

Anonymous said...

"but any U.S. intervention in that country would then mean that the U.S. would be responsible for fixing it .... and considering the monies and resources involved .... an unbelievably stupid option to pursue right now."

I don't think the U.S. would actually take any military action in Venezuela at this point, especially with the current situation in North Korea. This statement from Trump, I believe, is just to put more pressure on Maduro and his military and to embolden the opposition.

Aizino Smith said...

"The second Iraq War was a giant mess from the start. "

2nd War? There was one war. There was an interlude where Hussein failed to live up to the armistice.

fred lapides said...

One war based on a lie...we had sent in jsoc to check for any possible use of WMD...Bush got us involved! and Bush also let go of all the top military, who then formed ISIS...a huge mistake ps: AS..do your usual googling for info, selective stuff, and of course ignore when i am right and you are not

Aizino Smith said...


Poor Fred,

I am old enough to remember the news casts of Iraqis holding up UN inspectors for hours and days.

When you are held up for days, it is no longer a surprise inspection is it now.

Could you, Fast Freddy, hold up a cop who had a warrant issued by a judge to search your house for a couple of days?

If after 3 days the cops were finally able to search your house and found nothing, could we conclude nothing was ever there?

There were several points to invading Iraq. WMDs were not the only one. There had been numerous ceasefire violations, REMF. Saddam was also hosting terror groups.

Abu Nidal
Abu Hassan
MEK

You recognize those names?

Maybe you do. Maybe you send money to Abu Nidal.

B.Poster said...

Aizino,

You are materially correct, however, this is not how the war was sold. The war was sold based upon Iraqi WMD. The WMD were not "there" as in where we thought they'd be.

Did someone lie or was this an error? While I still lean in the direction of error, there is the possibility we were lied to in order to obtain support for this.

Disbanding the Iraqi military was a HUGE mistake. It's hard to imagine how soneone could have been that stupid. I suppose it is ideology that makes some people stupid.

Aizino Smith said...

You are materially correct, (however)

Why didn't you just use but instead of however, because you went all but monkey?

Between uncertain intel, surprise inspections that were not surprises, Sadam's previous intentions and Sadams' bluster
_____________________________________________

Disbanding the Iraqi military was a HUGE mistake

Maybe, but we were following the WW2 blueprint of occupied Germany. I am sure that Freddy without hindsight would have followed the Germany WW2 model. After all you are Jewish ( or di you forget?) and are all 'up' on the NAZIs.

A few months back you said you were 84. Now recently you said you were 88. Are you a dog?
Because that would make sense, if we were counting dog years.

B.Poster said...

If we were following the blueprint for WW2 in Iraq, perhaps this was part of the problem. Iraq circa 2003 was not Nazi Germany of WW2. the United States was not the same country it was during WW2, and the Iraq war was not WW2. As such, different strategies and tactics would have been needed than those used in WW2.

I think I have said this before here, perhaps not. In order to properly conduct the Iraq ware we would have needed enough troops to do the following. 1.) Overthrow the government. 2.)Secure all suspected WMD sites. 3.)Secure the all of the weapons depots. 4.)Provide security for the civilian population. 5.)Secure the borders eliminating the possibility of insurgents coming in from other countries. 6.)Secure the oilfields and the pipelines.

To do so probably would have required a troop commitment of ten times what we sent. The bottom line is we were sold this war based upon Iraqi WMD. This turned out to be incorrect. Did people know better but they lied us into war or was this an error? At present, I lean in the direction of error but there does appear to be a strong possibility that we were deliberately mislead.