Colombian police officers stand in front of people queueing to try to cross into Colombia from Venezuela through Simon Bolivar international bridge in Cucuta, Colombia, January 24, 2018. REUTERS/Carlos Garcia Rawlins
Business Insider: Officials keep talking about intervening in Venezuela, and it's drawing an ominous comparison
* Trump has repeatedly expressed interest in taking military action in Venezuela.
* Experts and officials from around the region have rebuffed such action, with some comparing it to the invasion of Iraq.
* But others have held out military action, as part of a collective response, as an option of last resort.
President Donald Trump's unexpected declaration in August 2017 that he was "not going to rule out a military option" in Venezuela earned swift rebuke both inside and outside the US.
But in the year since the US has kept pressure on Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro's government, punishing dozens of officials with sanctions but sparing others in a gambit to stoke tensions in Caracas.
Trump has reportedly pressed his advisers and Latin American leaders about military action, citing what he believed to be past successful US-led interventions, and officials from his administration met with, but ultimately rebuffed, Venezuelan officials looking for help to depose Maduro.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: Remarks from top White House officials hint at more actions against Venezuela in the coming days .... U.S. preparing 'actions' in coming days against Venezuela: Pompeo to Fox News (Reuters). My prediction is that it will just be more sanctions. As for a military option .... it would take over 100,000 U.S. soldiers and billions to repair Venezuela's infrastructure .... a course of action that I doubt many Americans (if any) would be in favor of.
3 comments:
It is good anti-communist propaganda to let these people implode.
Of course liberals will decry sanction and will say they are immoral, illegal, and lead to the implosion.
101 years after the first woman, Montana Rep. Jeannette Rankin REPUBLICAN, went to Congress."
Yeah, the bitches at NPR purposefully left that out.
A) Jeannette Rankin voted against going to war against Japan.
B) She thought Japan went to war, because we embargoed them.
We did embargo them. Was it immoral or illegal?
Did we have to keep trading scrap iron and oil to Japan as they killed 50 million Chinese?
Given the liberal response about Venezuelan sanctions, the answer would be that Rankin was right and that we should have participated indirectly in the genocide of the Chinese people.
If I had Richard Branson's $$$, I would _________ people into China.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDnvXAkMnx8
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeannette_Rankin
" The December 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor put an end to isolationism, but Rankin remained true to her anti-war beliefs, becoming the only member of Congress to vote against declaring war against Japan." - Senate.gov
http://www.naswfoundation.org/pioneers/r/rankin.html
" Rankin believed the President had been deliberately provoking Japan with trade sanctions and embargoes, knowing that war with Japan would necessitate a war with the other Axis powers: Germany and Italy." - The New Historian
Now all the liberal wingnuts, unwashed arch liberals and other clingers have to defend being against sanctions now against Venezuela and then against Japan.
Remember bitter clingers/libtards if you are against sanction then the genocide of a billion people would have come to pass.
Remember there was more than just Rankin. Lindbergh took a pacifist stance for awhile.
Charles was a pacifist as well.
We needed to be in WW2. Hitler was evil.
We did not need to be in Ww1. If we hadn't been in WW1, WW2 might never have happened.
Post a Comment