Good analysis. I think everything you have said is spot on. However, your naivete is beyond belief in respect to the future for Venezuela. When has the US benefited any country that it has taken troops into? Not since Korea, not Vietnam, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, Haiti. What about the countries where we have tried successfully to foment revolution like Chili, Cuba, El Salvador even Mexico? What have we done for these countries? What makes you think a good move like eliminating Maduro is going to have good outcomes? Particularly when even Maduro's enemies did not want him to be ousted by the USA much less have us come in and run the government.
John, fair critique, and I’m not going to dismiss it.
You’re absolutely right: the U.S. track record of “intervention” producing stable, sovereign democracies is not good. Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Haiti, these aren’t footnotes, they’re warnings. And even when we “win,” we often leave chaos, corruption, dependency, or proxy-control behind.
So let me clarify something: I’m not assuming this ends well. I’m saying Maduro being removed can be good, but only under very specific conditions, and I don’t trust those conditions will happen automatically, especially under Trump. And that brings me to what I think you’re missing about this moment:
1) This isn’t a normal intervention, because this isn’t a normal president
We’re not talking about some standard foreign policy doctrine. We’re talking about Trump, who operates like a dealmaker with a flag in one hand and a contract in the other. That makes the risk profile worse, not better.
2) Venezuela isn’t Iraq, it’s a prize
Venezuela has the largest proven oil reserves on earth, and Trump has already publicly framed the country in transactional terms. That’s not “democracy promotion.” That’s an asset play.
3) The “51st state” idea isn’t crazy, it’s exactly the kind of move he’d float
I would not be surprised at all if Trump tries to push Venezuela toward annexation-lite: protectorate status, “temporary administration,” resource control, maybe even the rhetoric of statehood to sell it domestically. I’m not saying it will happen, I’m saying the fact that it’s plausible tells you what kind of world we’re in.
So yes, you’re correct: eliminating Maduro does not guarantee a good outcome.
But I also reject the fatalism that says “nothing good can ever come from a dictator being removed.”
Here’s the truth: Venezuelans have been trapped between two forms of exploitation, internal dictatorship and external leverage. Maduro’s removal might be the first crack in that prison wall in a long time. But I’m not naive. I’m cautious.
The real question is whether this becomes: a transition to elections and sovereignty
or a foreign-run extraction and permanent leverage system.
Sorry Alexious. I think I was being too blunt and not very tactful. I want to say again that I think your analysis was right on target and that I know from what you wrote that you care about the Venezuelan people. If more people had your empathy, the world would be a much better place and America would not be in the position it is today. I can only tell you that I wish and hope the best for Venezuelans. They deserve the same as Americans. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Unfortunately, the present administration seems to want to reserve these for the elite. I hope it works out better in Venezuela.
Good analysis. I think everything you have said is spot on. However, your naivete is beyond belief in respect to the future for Venezuela. When has the US benefited any country that it has taken troops into? Not since Korea, not Vietnam, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, Haiti. What about the countries where we have tried successfully to foment revolution like Chili, Cuba, El Salvador even Mexico? What have we done for these countries? What makes you think a good move like eliminating Maduro is going to have good outcomes? Particularly when even Maduro's enemies did not want him to be ousted by the USA much less have us come in and run the government.
John, fair critique, and I’m not going to dismiss it.
You’re absolutely right: the U.S. track record of “intervention” producing stable, sovereign democracies is not good. Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Haiti, these aren’t footnotes, they’re warnings. And even when we “win,” we often leave chaos, corruption, dependency, or proxy-control behind.
So let me clarify something: I’m not assuming this ends well. I’m saying Maduro being removed can be good, but only under very specific conditions, and I don’t trust those conditions will happen automatically, especially under Trump. And that brings me to what I think you’re missing about this moment:
1) This isn’t a normal intervention, because this isn’t a normal president
We’re not talking about some standard foreign policy doctrine. We’re talking about Trump, who operates like a dealmaker with a flag in one hand and a contract in the other. That makes the risk profile worse, not better.
2) Venezuela isn’t Iraq, it’s a prize
Venezuela has the largest proven oil reserves on earth, and Trump has already publicly framed the country in transactional terms. That’s not “democracy promotion.” That’s an asset play.
3) The “51st state” idea isn’t crazy, it’s exactly the kind of move he’d float
I would not be surprised at all if Trump tries to push Venezuela toward annexation-lite: protectorate status, “temporary administration,” resource control, maybe even the rhetoric of statehood to sell it domestically. I’m not saying it will happen, I’m saying the fact that it’s plausible tells you what kind of world we’re in.
So yes, you’re correct: eliminating Maduro does not guarantee a good outcome.
But I also reject the fatalism that says “nothing good can ever come from a dictator being removed.”
Here’s the truth: Venezuelans have been trapped between two forms of exploitation, internal dictatorship and external leverage. Maduro’s removal might be the first crack in that prison wall in a long time. But I’m not naive. I’m cautious.
The real question is whether this becomes: a transition to elections and sovereignty
or a foreign-run extraction and permanent leverage system.
Sorry Alexious. I think I was being too blunt and not very tactful. I want to say again that I think your analysis was right on target and that I know from what you wrote that you care about the Venezuelan people. If more people had your empathy, the world would be a much better place and America would not be in the position it is today. I can only tell you that I wish and hope the best for Venezuelans. They deserve the same as Americans. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Unfortunately, the present administration seems to want to reserve these for the elite. I hope it works out better in Venezuela.