Russian troops land in Venzuela

[Bengalzona]

https://thinkprogress.org/russian-troops-land-in-venezuela-as-us-considers-military-options-59acc24966d3/

Quote:Russian troops land in Caracas as US considers military intervention in Venezuela

Nearly 100 Russian troops have reportedly landed in the Venezuelan capital of Caracas as the United States, which has hinted that a military option is “on the table,” continues to pressure the country’s president to step down.

Reuters reported Sunday that two Russian planes arrived in Caracas on Saturday, one of them thought to have carried Vasily Tonkoshkurov, chief of staff for Russian ground forces.

Neither Venezuelan nor Russian authorities have issued a comment on the flights.

Venezuela and Russia held joint military exercises in January, and Russian President Vladimir Putin has criticized U.S. support for opposition leader Juan Guaido, who has declared himself interim president, as an interventionist.

Moscow has also vowed to step in and prevent “any provocations to shed blood.”

This is the latest measure indicating stronger support from Moscow for embattled President Nicolas Maduro’s regime. On Wednesday, Maduro said Russia would be shipping humanitarian aid into Venezuela, which has been suffering from major political and financial upheaval for the last four years.

In December, Russia sent two bomber aircraft capable of carrying nuclear weapons to Venezuela.

Accused of corruption by some, Maduro has been resisting pressure to step down as the country’s economy has taken a beating, with its currency in free-fall, hyperinflation and the exodus of over 3 million people into neighboring countries.

On Friday, the U.S. Treasury Department issued fresh sanctions on Venezuela, with National Security Advisor John Bolton issuing a threat via Twitter.

“To those who are helping send the Venezuelan people’s wealth out of the country to benefit Maduro and his cronies, you are on notice today that the United States is watching,” he wrote.

In addition to levying heavy sanctions on Venezuela’s oil industry and calling on the country’s military elite to turn against Maduro, the Trump administration send convoys of aid to the Colombia-Venezuela border in February.

This was shortly after Bolton unintentionally disclosed, via a line on a notepad held in plain sight before press cameras, that the United States was considering sending 5,000 troops to the border.

Aid was blocked at the Colombian and Brazilian borders by Venezuelan troops using teargas and force, resulting in two deaths. Since then, the country has been mired in prolonged power and telecom outages that led to schools and hospitals being shut down.

News of the Russian planes landing in Caracas comes the same day Attorney General William Barr confirmed in a bombshell letter that, according to special counsel Robert Mueller, Russians launched an interference campaign during the 2016 campaign meant to swing the outcome of U.S. elections.

Mueller, who was charged with investigating allegations of collusion between President Donald Trump’s campaign and Russian officials, and allegations of obstruction and misconduct by the president, determined that Russian actors successfully staged a disinformation campaign during the lead up to the election and “successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks.”

According to Barr, Mueller’s final report did not find evidence of any American involvement in those acts, either inside or outside the Trump campaign.

[Benton]

Quote:“To those who are helping send the Venezuelan people’s wealth out of the country to benefit Maduro and his cronies, you are on notice today that the United States is watching,” he wrote.

And then Bolton took to Twitter to issue a stern warn to US companies hiding $2.5 trillion in offshore accounts to escape taxes, while spending millions in the form of lobbyist dollars.

[Yojimbo]

I’m firmly in the camp of “we need to leave Venezuela the **** alone”. So what if THEIR ALLY landed troops in THEIR country. We have no authority to pick and choose the relationships that other sovereign nations choose to make.

[*michaelsean*]

(03-25-2019, 11:45 AM)Yojimbo Wrote: I’m firmly in the camp of “we need to leave Venezuela the **** alone”. So what if THEIR ALLY landed troops in THEIR country. We have no authority to pick and choose the relationships that other sovereign nations choose to make.

Yup leave that one alone.  

[Bengalzona]

(03-25-2019, 11:45 AM)Yojimbo Wrote: I’m firmly in the camp of “we need to leave Venezuela the **** alone”. So what if THEIR ALLY landed troops in THEIR country. We have no authority to pick and choose the relationships that other sovereign nations choose to make.

It would ideal if we could. But we have apparently already stuck our neck in. Between their massive oil reserves and the need of some in our country feel to prove that socialism must fail, there are those who want us involved.

[*michaelsean*]

(03-25-2019, 01:35 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: It would ideal if we could. But we have apparently already stuck our neck in. Between their massive oil reserves and the need of some in our country feel to prove that socialism must fail, there are those who want us involved.

Venezuela will sell the oil regardless of who is in charge so who gives a crap?

[Bengalzona]

(03-25-2019, 02:13 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Venezuela will sell the oil regardless of who is in charge so who gives a crap?

Our oil companies.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-25-2019, 01:35 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: It would ideal if we could. But we have apparently already stuck our neck in. Between their massive oil reserves and the need of some in our country feel to prove that socialism must fail, there are those who want us involved.

The oil is important, but it isn't nearly the strategic concern that it once was, the US is now the world's largest oil producer.  Of course the US doesn't want a Russian or Chinese presence in the western hemisphere and yes that is 100% hypocritical.  As far as proving socialism must fail, Venezuela did that completely on their own.

[Dill]

(03-25-2019, 11:45 AM)Yojimbo Wrote: I’m firmly in the camp of “we need to leave Venezuela the **** alone”. So what if THEIR ALLY landed troops in THEIR country. We have no authority to pick and choose the relationships that other sovereign nations choose to make.

(03-25-2019, 01:16 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Yup leave that one alone.  

[GMDino]

(03-25-2019, 02:25 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The oil is important, but it isn't nearly the strategic concern that it once was, the US is now the world's largest oil producer.  Of course the US doesn't want a Russian or Chinese presence in the western hemisphere and yes that is 100% hypocritical.  As far as proving socialism must fail, Venezuela did that completely on their own.

Serious question:  How do our reserves stack up with others though?  I know the shale oil supply is good, but only if oil remains above a certain price.  At least that was the case 5+ years ago.

Not that I disagree with the idea that we should not interfere for simple oil reasons.  

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-25-2019, 03:25 PM)GMDino Wrote: Serious question:  How do our reserves stack up with others though?  I know the shale oil supply is good, but only if oil remains above a certain price.  At least that was the case 5+ years ago.

Not that I disagree with the idea that we should not interfere for simple oil reasons.  

According to this we rank tenth.  You are correct that shale oil needs production needs oil prices to be at a certain level to be profitable.  However, I'm not talking about profitability, I'm talking strategically.  In an armed conflict the cost of extracting shale oil is almost a non-issue.  

[*michaelsean*]

(03-25-2019, 03:21 PM)Dill Wrote:

It’s the Asian part of Russia

[GMDino]

(03-25-2019, 03:31 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: According to this we rank tenth.  You are correct that shale oil needs production needs oil prices to be at a certain level to be profitable.  However, I'm not talking about profitability, I'm talking strategically.  In an armed conflict the cost of extracting shale oil is almost a non-issue.  

Certainly!  LOL!  Suddenly socialism (government supporting the extraction companies) will be loved by everyone!

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-25-2019, 03:45 PM)GMDino Wrote: Certainly!  LOL!  Suddenly socialism (government supporting the extraction companies) will be loved by everyone!

Socialism is government ownership of the means of production.  Subsidies are not socialism, especially when they are given in order to ensure national survival.  In any event, these types of things are also covered by concepts like war bonds, not exactly a socialist construct.  Lastly, if you're trying to make an argument for socialism, a thread about the utterly failed socialist state of Venezuela seems a poor place to do it.

[GMDino]

(03-25-2019, 03:52 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Socialism is government ownership of the means of production.  Subsidies are not socialism, especially when they are given in order to ensure national survival.  In any event, these types of things are also covered by concepts like war bonds, not exactly a socialist construct.  Lastly, if you're trying to make an argument for socialism, a thread about the utterly failed socialist state of Venezuela seems a poor place to do it.

I'm not making an argument for anything.  I'm just joking that if the government started funding the extraction companies the GOP would love to have bigger government involvement and the use of funds for it.  And I didn't think about war bonds (something we went without the last couple wars), but everyone contributing to a common cause works for me whether that is "socialism" or not. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-25-2019, 04:01 PM)GMDino Wrote: I'm not making an argument for anything.

My apologies for the incorrect interpretation of your statements

Quote:  I'm just joking that if the government started funding the extraction companies the GOP would love to have bigger government involvement and the use of funds for it.  And I didn't think about war bonds (something we went without the last couple wars), but everyone contributing to a common cause works for me whether that is "socialism" or not. 

What's preventing the government from doing exactly that?  My impression is that government involvement is wholly unnecessary given that private industry took the initiative in this regard.  War bonds are absolutely a form of "we're all in this together".  However, you also profit from them, it's give now receive more later.  We haven't needed war bonds as our conflicts were not nearly on the scale of the second world war.  Also, extreme situations can require extreme measures that would be unpractical, unworkable or unacceptable under ordinary circumstances.

[Yojimbo]

(03-25-2019, 03:21 PM)Dill Wrote:

Never ok with that doctrine and it is way too old to apply now. It’s original intent was to keep other European countries from colonizing Central and South America. It’s been warped into “stay out of my yard!” Again none of our business what another sovereign nation wants to do to itself.

I don’t get how we can say with a straight face that Russia can’t get involved in South America because it’s too close to us, yet we have military within a stone throw of Russia. Does the Monroe Doctrine now apply everywhere outside of Russia/China own borders?

[Bengalzona]

(03-25-2019, 02:25 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The oil is important, but it isn't nearly the strategic concern that it once was, the US is now the world's largest oil producer.  Of course the US doesn't want a Russian or Chinese presence in the western hemisphere and yes that is 100% hypocritical.  As far as proving socialism must fail, Venezuela did that completely on their own.

Mostly true, but they have had some assistance from us.

[Dill]

(03-25-2019, 04:31 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: Never ok with that doctrine and it is way too old to apply now. It’s original intent was to keep other European countries from colonizing Central and South America. It’s been warped into “stay out of my yard!” Again none of our business what another sovereign nation wants to do to itself.

I don’t get how we can say with a straight face that Russia can’t get involved in South America because it’s too close to us, yet we have military within a stone throw of Russia. Does the Monroe Doctrine now apply everywhere outside of Russia/China own borders?

I have always found it problematic and puzzling.

But we have needed that precedent to overthrow democratic governments in favor of US corporations.

You got the Russia thing all wrong.  This is how you should be looking at it.

[hollodero]

(03-25-2019, 02:25 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: As far as proving socialism must fail, Venezuela did that completely on their own.

(03-25-2019, 03:52 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Socialism is government ownership of the means of production.

I still kind of object this description, as it is only one of many different definitions. This one is merely the historical one - but most western socialists to not define themselves that way or align with this goal.

I consider myself living in a socialist state and this state has not failed. Certainly not Venezuelan-style. We do kinda suck at soccer, but that's not due to socialism, as the US proves.