Greenland is not a source of drugs or immigrants. It is run by a liberal democracy. America already has the legal ability to put additional military facilities there and to mine for rare earths. So why is Trump so determined to take it away from Denmark?
The answer is clear–Trump bears a grudge for the impacts the Vikings made on Christian civilization a thousand years ago. That explains why he hates Minnesota so much, as well.
What, you think there’s another reason?
Vladimir Putin does regime change, but not nation-building. He finds the most competent, ruthless, and loyal thug in the area, gives him the keys to the car, and mostly leaves him to his own devices. If the guy doesn’t work out, he finds another one. This limits his military and financial exposure if things go wrong.
Trump has clearly decided this is the way to handle Venezuela; it can’t turn into another Iraq if there is no occupation and no effort to recreate liberal democracy. The problem, of course, is that Venezuela could tear itself apart and turn into another Libya. Obama tried the no boots on the ground approach there, and it didn’t exactly end well.
And as Putin found out in Syria, and his Soviet predecessors discovered many times before that, the choice of a new thug may be out of your hands if your guy can’t cut the mustard.
The neocons are back, baby! Trump has removed the murderous dictator from Venezuela. We’ll be installing the real victor from the last election, and liberal democracy will be reinstated. Life in Venezuela will be good again, and the righteous power of America will be on full display. No one will remember Iraq anymore.
But . . . wait! Trump says there won’t be elections for the foreseeable future, and he’s playing ball with the remainder of the corrupt regime, which is all of it less Maduro. All he talks about is making money off of oil. That doesn’t sound much like liberal democracy to us.
But no worries. It will just take a little time. Trump has shown his heart is really in the right place. He can be steered in the right direction. And you can trust Marco, right? Right?
Dream on, gang. Venezuela, like everything else, is about Trump showing his dominance over his opponents. Oil is also important to him. Liberal democracy, not so much, particularly if it would require a lengthy and large-scale occupation, as it would.
Pete Hegseth is determined to punish Mark Kelly for making public statements about the obligation to disobey unlawful orders. Kelly’s words are consistent with liberal democratic values and are still the official policy of the American military as of today. What is going on here?
The only possible explanation I can see is that Hegseth is determined to make the American military a right-wing militia that is unconditionally obligated to obey Donald Trump. It’s a point I’ve made many times over the past year because it represents a huge danger to our political system.
Can you think of any other reason he would do it?
Hawaii was an independent nation until the 1890s. The McKinley Tariff, however, made it impossible for ethnic American sugar plantation owners to make money by exporting to the United States. The plantation owners consequently generated a coup and called for military assistance from the US, which was, in fact, forthcoming. This act of imperialism was very controversial, but Hawaii was ultimately annexed because of its value to American security during the Spanish-American War.
Icy Greenland doesn’t look much like balmy Hawaii at first glance, but Trump wants it for its strategic location and its minerals even though it belongs to a fellow NATO member. Could he be contemplating a coup and follow-up invasion–tactics also used in Panama–to expedite a 21st century annexation? It certainly can’t be ruled out, even though, as the Danes correctly note, it would mean the end of NATO.
The bottom line here is that Trump’s imperialism is a personal, not a partisan, quest. It isn’t being driven by anyone in his party outside of his inner circle. As soon as something goes wrong, there will be major problems.
Marco Rubio would undoubtedly like to take his family’s homeland as part of the new American empire. But Cuba no longer presents any kind of a military or ideological threat to us, and it doesn’t have oil or any valuable minerals. For Trump, it is a less appealing target than, say, Greenland.
Don’t expect it to be a high priority for Trump in the next few years.
The Venezuela episode has shown once again that Trump has zero interest in upholding international law. The only law he respects is that of the jungle–the strong do what they want, and the weak suffer what they must. That’s not exactly great news for the people of Cuba, Greenland, Taiwan, and Ukraine.
On a related note, it occurred to me this morning that Trump’s idea of a successful military campaign is one of those mass smash-and-grab retail thefts you sometimes see in California. Unfortunately, that kind of approach won’t help us take the oil; for that, an occupation will be required.
On Saturday, Trump told us that he was going to run Venezuela, and that we were taking the oil. Yesterday, Marco Rubio said we were not going to occupy the country; we would merely maintain our blockade and coerce the remnants of the old regime to do our bidding.
The Rubio version of the plan is a return to the tactics before the attack. If he’s right, and no occupation is contemplated, what was the point of killing scores of Venezuelans and Cubans? Just to prove to unfriendly leaders that we can?
What’s the real plan, Stan?
Maduro’s alleged role as a “narco-terrorist” was never more than a pretext for American actions against Venezuela. Nevertheless, Trump has captured him, so he must now give the man a public trial and prove he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. What if the prosecution fails?
I don’t know how strong the DOJ’s case is, but there are bound to be significant jurisdictional issues, and there is reason to believe that Maduro’s personal involvement in the drug trade was overblown for propaganda purposes. The case, like so many others, may turn out to be an embarrassment–Trump’s equivalent of the missing WMD. As a result, I’m guessing that Bondi won’t exactly be in a huge hurry to get the case to trial.
Assume you are the Venezuelan Minister of the Interior. You are a patriot, and the thought of Trump, Rubio, and Hegseth running your country doesn’t exactly appeal to you. You are planning to resist. What do you do?
Three things. First, you prepare for a guerrilla war, to be fought mostly in the jungle. You can anticipate some assistance from the ELN, from drug gangs, and from lots of international volunteers. Second, you take American hostages. Third, you plant explosives with timers on as many oil producing facilities as possible, and you make sure Trump hears about it. It is now clear, if there was ever any doubt, that the principal American objective is control over Venezuelan oil; Trump might be more willing to negotiate if he has reason to believe he will be inheriting nothing but wreckage.
My prediction has officially been blown up. Trump says we are going to “run” Venezuela. Exactly how that is going to happen, he didn’t really say, probably because he has no idea.
We will have to send a large force to occupy the country. Assuming, for purposes of argument, that the remainder of the regime simply surrenders and doesn’t start a guerrilla war, it will take years to fix Venezuela’s oil facilities. If and when that occurs, the benefits will flow to multinational oil companies, not to average Americans. And that’s the best case scenario; the worst case is Iraq.
Sounds great, doesn’t it?
Our military attacked bases in Venezuela and apparently captured Maduro and his wife early this morning. Does that completely blow up my Venezuela prediction three days into the new year? Yes and no. Yes, in that we obviously won’t be making a deal with Maduro. No, in that most of the regime’s security apparatus will remain intact, and there has been no invasion. The use of a large number of American ground troops will be the red line for both the MAGA base and my prediction.
What happens now? If Machado can saunter back into her country and receive the peaceful surrender of the remainder of the regime, great. That seems implausible. It is far more likely that we are now in an undeclared and unprovoked war with Venezuela that has little support from the American public, and that an invasion will be necessary to bring about real regime change. Will Trump take the risk of creating his own version of Iraq, or will be make the deal I suggested in my prediction with the new head thug in Venezuela? TBD.
It was always going to be difficult to persuade the electorate to do anything meaningful about climate change when the impacts were exclusively in the future even though science could easily predict them. After all, how many people would choose pain now over slightly less pain later?
But the effects of climate change are here and now. Furthermore, they are not limited to a handful of states. Insurance rates are soaring all over the country. And yet, the public is mostly unmoved, and the Democrats have been forced to retreat to a posture of “realism” that promotes renewable energy along with the slightly less dirty kind.
Any progress we make at this point will be dependent on the market and the rest of the world. It is stupid and shameful, and hardly an advertisement for our political system, which values the interests of a handful of miners over hundreds of thousands of solar panel installers.
Trump apparently threatened to use force against the Iranian regime if it shoots protesters in a post on Lying Psycho this morning. No one in Iran is going to take this threat seriously, but it will help the regime make the case that the protesters are just tools of the Great Satan.
My question is, will Ayatollah Khamenei make the same promise to protect the First Amendment rights of American protesters when Trump decides to shoot them?