439 Comments
User's avatar
SimulationCommander's avatar

Never has this Karl Rove quote been more apt:

“We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”

Frank Lee's avatar

The American political establishment that Rove occupies would have used covert national security moves to try and undermine Maduro and support regime change. Not only is that method no longer effective, it is much more dark and dirty than Trump's direct and transparent use of the US military to effect the same indented change.

The EUtards clearly eager to milk this as more anti-US and anti-Trump vibes meanwhile are deep into their own old ineffective spook games to set the global stage for their county's advantage.

LMS's avatar

The former American political establishment is responsible for the creation of the Maduro regime.

Warmek's avatar

Among many, many other things. 😕

Rosemary B's avatar

absolutely - many many things jeez

Danimal28's avatar

And are probably on the laundered American taxpayer payroll; Dubya chose not to do this in the oughts and it is telling.

Monroe Doctrine 101.

User's avatar
Comment deleted
Jan 4
Comment deleted
Michelle Dostie's avatar

Western Hemisphere again.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

The Monroe Doctrine of 1823 returns.

Sherry 1's avatar

…except they are too stupid to do anything except import an army composed of migrants.

SomeDude's avatar

Agreed that outright military violation of another country's borders is a small improvement over clandestine un"intelligence" agency regime change like in 2014 Ukraine

Warmek's avatar

We did not need to adopt that circus, nor those monkeys.

Yeah, yeah, drugs bad. I know. Prohibition 2.0 is twice as retarded and equally effective as Prohibition 1.0 was. Twice as retarded, I say, because we really should have learned something the first time.

Mitch Barrie's avatar

No one ever learns anything. I was astonished how people who were adults during the Vietnam debacle nonetheless decided to invade Afghanistan and Iraq.

Warmek's avatar

Quoting myself from 2002: "Oh my fucking God, we're seriously going to invade a place known as the 'Graveyard of Empires'?"

SimulationCommander's avatar

What could go wrong!?!??!?

Warmek's avatar

I'm sure it will be fine.

SimulationCommander's avatar

Hold on....I'm now getting word.....

It wasn't fine.

Jeck's avatar
Jan 3Edited

It struck me as orchestrated as ritual humiliation. Our Leaders' boss (which was/is obviously not the citizens) wanted to make the USA eat shit....and die.

la chevalerie vit's avatar

Bush 43: "Hold my beer."

Chartertopia's avatar

One surprising comparison I learned much later was how similar Vietnam was to the 1775-1783 revolution. The imperial power fought peasants on the other side of a huge ocean which they had to ship almost all their supplies across, the peasants had the help of foreign powers, and the peasants won.

Bizarro Man's avatar

It's a good thing we won that war. Otherwise, we'd all be speaking Vietnamese now.

Warmek's avatar

I *do* like the food. Never could get the hang of the tones in the language though.

Joy Filled's avatar

LMAO where I am getting a pedicure from the local 'owned and woman operated" Vietnamese nail salon!

Keith's avatar

No one ever learns anything. They have forgotten how they intervened in WWI and WWII. Oh wait, that was a success...

Warmek's avatar

Questionable, honestly, as regards WWI. If the US *hadn't* gotten involved, WWII might not have happened at all. Impossible to prove at this point, of course.

Chartertopia's avatar

My instinct too. The war was the result of too many interlocking mutual aid treaties, and while Kaiser WIlhelm II was the primary troublemaker, if Britain had stayed out, it would have been a replay of 1870 and over within the year ... probably. If Woodrow Wilson and his cronies had not taken Britain's side and loaned them so much with tacit government backing, Britain would have had to drop out.

Just stop meddling. It's a simple principle.

Dave S's avatar

Thomas "Woodrow" Wilson was a tool of the Brits. In fact, Wilson was just a disgusting thing. It's no wonder that the US Senate voted against the League of Nations, a nice slap in Wilson's face.

Keith's avatar

Sorry, but the likelihood of Britain just 'dropping out' of WWI when they started losing without America's help was never going to happen.

Just stop meddling = never intervene militarily. Is that your position?

Steve's avatar

I'm not convinced Germany was the problem. They faced almost certain annihilation if France and Russia both attacked at once. Nick was already amassing troops on the border. This was the existential threat that the Schlieffen plan was developed for.

'Course, worked out about the same for Germany as if they had just let those other empires roll over them.

Mitch Barrie's avatar

Indeed, I believe you are right anyway. American intervention in WWI turned out to be a disaster, longer term.

Keith's avatar

So you think WWII might not have happened if the US hadn't got involved in WWI? On what do you base that claim?

Warmek's avatar

England was getting ready to pull out, and let the Kaiser have what he'd taken of France, until we stepped in. It was also a far more even battle until we did, and the absolutely crushing defeat of the Germans allowed the imposition of the ruinous Treaty of Versailles. German nationalism got a large boost from the humiliating terms of that treaty, and the costs imposed by it.

Chartertopia's avatar

If the US had not backed Britain, the war would have been over sooner, there would have been no Bolshevik revolution in Russia, and there would have been no stab in the back fable for Hitler to latch on to.

It was -zero- of the US's business. Woodrow Wilson's excuse for the war was Germany enforcing its own blockade of Britain, in retaliation for Britain's blockade of Germany, which was -- surprise surprise! -- in violation of accepted international law at the time, yet Woodrow Wilson let that slide.

Ken Kunda's avatar

Lack of any understanding of history or what actually happened.

Leif Oldhart's avatar

That claim is supported by my basic anti-semitism. What's it toya?

Klaus Hubbertz's avatar

{...Impossible to prove at this point...} ??? ... 🤔🤔🤔

Anti-Semitic

{...of course....} !!! ☝☝☝

User's avatar
Comment deleted
Jan 4
Comment deleted
Warmek's avatar

I am unfamiliar with Hitler's involvement with WWI, beyond the fact that he was part of the Bundeswehr as a dispatch runner then. Or perhaps I have misunderstood your question? In the comment you are replying to, I am saying that if the USA had not stuck its dick into WWI, then WWII might never have happened.

Having *done* so, I do actually feel that getting stuck in on WWII was something of a moral responsibility. Though of course all of the wrong people got the short end of that. But then, it's never the "Masters of War" that end up in the trenches or on the front lines. I don't really want to retroactively consign either of my grandfathers to that, but it does seem to be the case that the lower classes always end up paying for the policy choices of the upper classes.

The Nazis *were* an abomination at least equal to the Communists. "We" having paved the way for their rise, "we" also had something of an ethical duty to put them down. Easy for me to say, of course, some 85 years later, and at no risk of having to deal with it myself. I don't know, none of these philosophical questions are easy.

Chartertopia's avatar

Bush support of Hitler? Which Hitler? Which Bush?

I suggest you switch alternate universes back. You're clearly not fir for purpose in this one.

cottonkid's avatar

Yeah, it's the second half of an arrogant story that began with, "We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality."

Nobody special's avatar

Drugs are the pretext. It’s the oil and the shoring up of our sphere of influence. Check out Matt Bracken’s latest for a good analysis.

Jeck's avatar

Smartmatic and Dominion not irrelevant.

mary-lou's avatar

but that's none of US' business. remember T allegedly lost in 2022 due to Smartmatic and Dominion meddling? such a magical excuse. same-same for all the botched elections lately in Europe: elections are an internal affair, has to do with sovereignity.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

It was 2020 and Trump’s attorney Powell submitted the Affidavit of Chavez’s assistant who created the program for CHAVEZ to win every election forever. I read the brief. The case was denied cert by SCOTUS, as they all were.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

19 pages, written in the affiant’s own hand. You don’t have to agree, but I am sure you are unfamiliar with the Court’s docket that day.

Willy's avatar

There’s no pretext. In spite of the fact that we’ve all lost people from fentanyl now and I’m all for prosecuting narco trafficking.

It’s about oil. And.

Trump said as much.

Either we control the country or China does. There are no other options.

In other words. Human civilization has not changed.

So we are doing stuff. And if we don’t. China does stuff.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

Reminiscent of our favorite congressman lately, and true statements about the existential threat to USA via CCP precursors, Venezuelan trafficking, and Mexican manufacturing and delivery to the USA. I’m not sure all understand that Fentanyl is masked to sell as an imitation of common drugs. Touching it can kill. A couple grains of salt sized dose has killed hundreds of thousands in the last few years. It has been a war and a comfort to see our military fight for us.

Willy's avatar

I could not agree more. Almost nobody in this country has not been touched by that substance in one form or other.

But it’s not really about the drugs. It’s about global power and control. And it’s about oil.

It’s not a war with Venezuela. It is however a war with China. They occupied this country and all its resources using Maduro as a front. And all that comes downstream of that is what comes.

So we took it from them.

Either we assert dominance and control over Venezuela or China does. It’s really that simple.

With no other options available (not in fantasy land of international “law”), I know which option I’m taking.

So I agree with the people saying “it’s about oil”. They’re correct. And that’s why I support the action (among other reasons)

Michelle Dostie's avatar

I understand the oil will be for Venezuelan economic rebirth. It was a joint venture with the US in the past as the infrastructure for drilling was built by the US and we will rebuild it.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

The drug cartels may look like a joke as a reason for a criminal conviction but the citizens in the US, it is a mark on our ability to keep our people safe by keeping the poisonous materials across our borders where enemies made them. The boats being shot up in the Caribbean were a relief to us, even as the rest of the world saw it as unnecessary.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

The oil drilling equipment and infrastructure was made by Chevron, an American company. Hugo Chavez stopped oil drilling and stole US tankers. Drilling and selling may be what brings prosperity back to Venezuela.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

The future will tell. I understand SOS Rubio has developed plans to make the transition smooth for returning Venezualans.

CMCM's avatar

Rubio's parents were Cuban, and he undoubtedly sees the removal of Maduro as a step to finally freeing the Cubans of the never ending dictatorship there. Cuba is supposedly propped up by Venezuela and Maduro at this point. Without Maduro, maybe that Commie regime will finally fall. Cubans in Florida are extremely happy about Maduro's removal.

Henrybowman's avatar

I'd love to se a lot of returning Venzuelans. Other than criminals shipped back there in chains by ICE, I'm not optimistic.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

Criminal illegal aliens, like the Trend De Arauga gangs who committed multiple felonies in the United States will be detained and deported by ICE per law.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

Narcoterrorism can never be a pretext when the trafficking has killed hundreds of thousands of civilians. Too close for comfort.

Hunterson7's avatar

A kleptocatic cf of a government is the reason for this. No pretext needed.

Chili's avatar

Bullshit. It is to thwart Venezuela's fuckery of our US national security by interdictng $$ from drugrunning offshore and oil which has been propping up the regime of this boobied arm flapping and former idiot bus driver Maduro who, with Cuba, has digitally hi-jacked our elections.

Steve's avatar
Jan 4Edited

Maybe. Though it turned out to be the whole enchilada with Noriega, despite all the popular theories to the contrary at the time.

Drugs is enough. Is the oil and regime change the reason or just icing? How could one know?

Michelle Dostie's avatar

Regarding the oil. Before Chavez nationalized it, the US oil companies (CHEVRON) built the infrastructure first drilling oil off of Venezuela. The US Americans and the Venezuelans both drilled oil from the same field. The US is drilling in our land, but if the oil companies agree, we will be spending billions of dollars to restore the drilling business in Venezuela for the Venezuelans to become wealthy again. As Rubio stated yesterday, the USA doesn’t need oil. I wouldn’t rule out a trade restoration with Venezuela in the future, but the remarks about billions for oil are to restore Venezuela.

Steve's avatar

Sadly, I think you are right. This is likely to become yet another money laundering scheme to bilk American wealth.

Nobody special's avatar

Drugs is never enough. Most Central and South American regimes have varying degrees of involvement with drug cartels as at least a necessary evil to maintain some modicum of order (not to mention historical use of drug trade by the CIA to finance preferred regimes). If drugs were enough, we’d invade most of Central and South America.

The pragmatic reality is that the world runs on energy and that energy will primarily be hydrocarbon based for the foreseeable future. As such, dominant powers will do what is necessary to secure control.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

Unfortunately the many cartels are on our borders, receiving precursors from China, with entry into the United States via Mexico, where the manufacturing sites are. A necessary evil?

Echo Tracer's avatar

That anyone even questions this when it is what Trump is openly saying, is astonishing to me. Guys you can’t rationalise this. He’s telling us his actual motives and they are as disgusting as the left would have you believe. Just admit that you’re a bunch of animals who simply do not care and never had any moral standards, and start openly lobbying to legalise paedophilic incest, it’s the next logical step of this path you are on.

Warmek's avatar

Sorry, we're not lefties.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

Disgusting thought.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

Where does he reside?

Joy Filled's avatar

Indeed! Drugs! Imagine the American govt being concerned about all the drugs/shots that are teeming into our bodies! Oh my!

Oil! Those datacenters are energy-thirsty beasts, especially those mining coins and feeding AI.

Money! Just look at the recent financial transactions, Donnies business took a huge ownership position in CITGO, 'former' oil producer in Ven.

Yes, yes, so many more layers of complexity for those who has eyes and a trap for those who choose not to.

Be not afraid. All will be well.

SimulationCommander's avatar

I certainly don't like the action we've taken here, but you can't deny the quote is tailor-made for this situation.

Warmek's avatar

Oh no, it's dead on. I just wish we weren't one, and that we were smart enough to learn from our own mistakes.

As long as I'm making wishes, I'll take thirty billion dollars and my 23 year old body back, though if I could get it without the arthritis or depression, that'd be nice too.

Rikard's avatar

Do note that Rove nowhere says the actions taken - the reality created - will conform to any specific political notion of anything, either.

In a way, it is a peculiar blend of realpolitik and the basic truth that [might makes right] in one scale, and of postmodernism and relativism [it is right if I say so] in the other.

Also, it is a good example of how to be straightforward while not really saying anything (and coming from me who can't write a straight sentence without meandering off into sub-sub-sub-clauses that's borderline a professional endorsement of the style...), letting the recipient fill in what he/she thinks is being said - as evidenced by the sub-thread the quote spawned.

I wonder why Rove never seems to have tried for presidency himself. Deemed too dangerous by his peers among the Republican party hierarchy maybe.

Hunterson7's avatar

Fentanyl is an order of magnitude worse than alcohol or even coke. Ending the perverse retake of Bolivaran Republic and allowing a nation with among the most oil reserves actually prosper is worth a 1 hour war.

Warmek's avatar

> a 1 hour war

"Marihuana Tax Act of 1937"

Sounds more like an 89 year war *against our own citizens* than one hour. But, I'm sorry, you had something vastly historically ignorant to say about Prohibition 2.0?

I am a former EMT who used to be married to a pharmacist. I am *precisely* aware of how much more potent fentanyl is than other opiates. I'm also aware of how we got to the point where people were using that *instead* of other opiates.

I've also actually read the Constitution. No doubt you are aware that the 18th Amendment provided Congress with the authority to ban alcohol, and the 21st Amendment repealed that authority.

Please cite which subsequent amendment granted Congress the authority to ban **any other** substance "for our own good".

Henrybowman's avatar

Wasn't an amendment. They dusted off "the treaty making power" and used that to end-run it. From Missouri v. Holland:

"We do not mean to imply that there are no qualifications to the treaty-making power; but they must be ascertained in a different way. It is obvious that there are matters of the sharpest exigency for the national well being that an act of congress cannot deal with but that a treaty followed by such an act could..."

The implications were so threatening that OH Senator Bricker proposed an amendment to clarify that the fedguv could not use treaties as an excuse to seize new powers otherwise undelegated to it. To a constitutionalist, this would be a slam dunk.. but after years of fighting, it was defeated by a coalition of pinkos, deep-staters, and "conservative" President Eisenhower.

https://fee.org/articles/globalism-and-sovereignty-a-short-history-of-the-bricker-amendment/

Warmek's avatar

That's pretty much my point, yeah. The War on Some Drugs is vastly unconditional, IMO.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

Thanks for the article. It touches on so many issues that are still relevant. I didn’t really know what you were responding to since it was primarily about International Treaties, and Past Presidents positions on national sovereignty.

Keith's avatar

Adopt which 'monkeys'? Do you mean the Venezuelans?

Alexander Scipio's avatar

Not our rodeo, not our clowns

Warmek's avatar

It's a riff on the phrase "Not my circus, not my monkeys". The monkeys in this case would be more "the set of problems facing Venezuela".

Keith's avatar

Ah, I see. The thing is that the US doesn't live in splendid isolation from the rest of the world and to some extent it matters to Americans what other countries are doing, especially those not a million miles away. If America were located in the Andromeda Galaxy then I would agree with you.

Warmek's avatar

I mean, it's true that we don't, but most of the problems we face from Venezuela could be remedied in far better fashion than taking the place over. Hopefully we'll hand things over to the fellow who actually won their last election and get out quickly. And hopefully that guy won't be a complete shitshow too.

Keith's avatar

And if that happens you will still maintain that it was a mistake to go in? If your answer is 'yes' then we can stop this discussion right now. And if your answer is 'no', then what the hell are you talking about here?

alewifey's avatar

The far better fashion won't give you 79-cent gas though

Michelle Dostie's avatar

We care especially when we wake up to hear bot China and Russia were occupying our Southern border overnight.

Chartertopia's avatar

And no other country is affected by the US? They do all live in splendid isolation and US imperialism doesn't affect them?

Keith's avatar

Er, no. I don't see your point. It is YOU, not me, who is advocating non-intervention because you believe what vbenezuela does doesn't affect the US. That's not a view that I take.

Echo Tracer's avatar

People who say prohibition one didn’t achieve its goals don’t understand quite how much Americans were drinking before it was initiated. How many drug and alcohol deaths would we have to see annually before we got prohibition again? We were there.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

The problem is that Fentanyl is not easy to identify. China manufactures it to look like other pharmaceuticals that people buy on the street, most notably Adderall for ADHD. Many have been prescribed this drug since they were children. It’s made to look the same, therefore safe. Unlike a glass of whiskey.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

We didn’t have poisons being bootlegged last century. It was alcohol.

Henrybowman's avatar

Desperately hunting for a sarcasm indicator anywhere here,

You do know that alcohol is literally a poison, right?

You do know that the result of Prohibition was that more lethal poisons ended up getting marketed in the form of incompetently-made booze?

Michelle Dostie's avatar

That is why many of us never imbibe, but we all have seen others drink too much. The comparison is between what kills every time, and what is drunk without killing on most occasions. Prohibition was the second, or there would be no need for a law.

Warmek's avatar

If fentanyl killed "every time", they wouldn't have given me patches containing it to stock on the ambulance.

Warfarin, prescribed as a blood thinner, is *literally* sold as rat poison.

Alcohol, as mentioned, is also a poison so common that it's used as a sterilizing agent.

More to the point, Congress lacks the constitutional authority to regulate any of it. At least with Prohibition 1.0 they went to the effort of following the rules to grant themselves that.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

Narcan is used by Police, First Responders, and Emergency Rooms, as it was used for heroin OD’s. Lately police have reported that they are not able to stock the amount of NARCAN necessary to stop Fentanyl OD’s due to the quantity needed. Glad you got it.

Henrybowman's avatar

In other words, "the dose makes the poison."

A truth that one-size-fits-all laws never wish to accommodate.

It is truly amazing the effort we expend on defeating Darwin, and all to our own detriment. We complain about political elites who act as if laws apply to everyone but them, then we evade natural laws with the same insolence because "we're special."

Chris's avatar

Frank, i think you nailed it. The EUtards (which includes the UK as they can’t seem to scratch their own ass w/o EHCR this and Euro logic that… what a wasted opportunity brexit was/is) seem to be stuck in envy mode and anti-NATO mode aka anti-US mode. If Britain continues its destabilization it should expect a rendition of its own (of 2TK Starmer).

Quakeress's avatar

Compare this blunt approach to the cautious lingo of EU bureaucrats.

the long warred's avatar

It’s not about oil, oil isn’t about oil. Oil is about the petrodollar.

This is also about geography and geopolitics.

AntonioB's avatar

well I recall this, when Rove mentioned it and it maybe me laugh. These Bush boys believed they were inventing the wheel. A typical manifestation of almost total lack of culture, knowledge of History. Because since ever brute force does obviously impact flow of events. Maybe Rove could study European History and try to understand what happens in Northern Black Sea since 2014,, as Russia secured Crimea, now Donbass and will probably shut off American oligarchy from Odessa even if not capturing the city (just render impossible for Americans to set a viable foot there)

the rule "might is right" that is being splashed openly by USA now, like back in the 19th century, when in 1848 they went to take Texas and California, in 1898 to Cuba and the small "banana republics" is not new, but by reviving it now in full force, in this contemporary internet world, the effect is that others who have some might will act the same way. USA problem is that it needs proxies in order to get some grip overseas.

LMS's avatar

I recall him saying this & wondering the hell this little pissant meant

kapock's avatar

You don’t recall him saying it since the quote appeared anonymously in a magazine article by Ron Suskind, though SimulationCommander’s attribution to Rove is widely accepted.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

Oh thanks. I’ll find it.

Henrybowman's avatar

“We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out."

Isn't that the entire premise of "American Gods?"

Michelle Dostie's avatar

American Gods? From whence cometh that phrase? And how is it interpreted?

Henrybowman's avatar

TV series of three seasons, from the Neil Gaiman book of the same name.

Gary S.'s avatar

Excellent quote!

Marten's avatar

Hear ya, a "Celebration" of ugliness in all its form !!!!!!

ZuZu’s Petals's avatar

I’m relieved to hear assurances from Kier Starmer that Britain was not involved.

Andrew Marsh's avatar

Fear not.

Mr Starmer KC will induce a fully diverse response, and quite possibly an outrage.

He is pacing himself.

He just might crush a whole grape.

Pat Robinson's avatar

Venezuela isn’t an Islamic state so Starmer and the EU have a bit of leeway here, they don’t have to come out stridently against it to please their more violently peaceful voting demographic.

Eric F. ONeill's avatar

Whoa, there, let’s not get radical!

Andrew Marsh's avatar

Mr Starmer KC is a famous body builder - hold on, I mean he likes healthy young men - hold on.... Ofcom on line..... yes, yes, yes........

OK: The approved view. Mr Starmer KC is glorious. Allegedly.

pobrecollie's avatar

I will be interested to see what he has to say.

He will be dying to virtue signal and "condemn" the actions of the US, at the same time as knowing that he is completely irrelevant to them, and he needs their approval far more than they need his.

Andrew Marsh's avatar

Indeed - you capture the predicament well.

Even though Mr Starmer KC protests he will be Prime Minister forever, reality will provide a brutal check for this comfortably off Marxist. This also applies to the words he will utter in vain over the Venezuela affair.

Jeremy Stewardson's avatar

Starmer couldn’t be involved even if he’d wanted to be . America acts , Starmer watches ……

Eric F. ONeill's avatar

Clearly, he likes to watch. A 21st century Chauncey Gardener.

ZuZu’s Petals's avatar

My comment was meant to be ironic.

Andrew Marsh's avatar

And all the more wonderful. A great understated ZuZu's Petals post.

Dr. Franz Hott's avatar

We didn't need those assurances, this was readily observable by the fact that the operation succeeded; at least the initial one with Maduro's capture. Unlike the British invasion of Kursk region, which turned out to be an unmitigated (apart from the show effect) disaster for Britain's supposed allies in the Ukraine Armed Forces.

Craig Miller's avatar

Me too! Say. did you hear about the sale on used French battle rifles? They have only been dropped once. Britain fits this as well. Look how it went for Percival and their fight on the Malay Peninsula. France, the EU and the UK would just get in our way and F things up.

William's avatar

Until his Islamic rape gangs are unleashed. He loves the broken pieces of his own people 🤢

Keith's avatar

This is the first news I've read today. At first I thought 'Wow, America has gone into Venezuela!' Then I thought, 'Ah, I see. It's just Eugyppius's joke. This is all far too dramatic to be real'. And then I double checked and it was real. How wonderful! Surprising things can still happen and the world isn't locked in a permanent stalemate. So what next? The Iranians overthrow the Mullahs? The AfD overthrows the German government? Israel sorts out the Middle East and we sort out our stupid progressive lefties? Thank goodness for Trump, if only for entertainment value.

pobrecollie's avatar

That last line sums it up well.

Drumpf talks a good game. Does a few good things, plenty of bad things, but at least he winds up the left like no one else.

Steve Stone's avatar

I laughed out loud while reading this. It's 100% true! No one gives a damned what the globalists of the UN and the EU think. It's not like they ever do anything other that suck the blood out of people who work for a living. How long is the world (Europe in particular) going to put up with these parasites?

Rikard's avatar

Now imagine an EU with competent leadership.

Then, in 2014, it would have annexed Libya, Tunisia and parts of Algeria and used these areas as a dumping ground for all illegals, and for criminals.

They would have put together an expeditionary force over ten years ago to do exactly what Trump finally did: start the process of taking control of Venezuela's oil.

Instead, the EU have splurged its rapidly dwindling resources on . . . what?

Power outages, rolling blackouts, pouring hundreds of billions of Euros each year into various black holes of corruption, and seemingly actively seeking to replay the period between 500AD and 1066AD.

Warmek's avatar

> Now imagine an EU with competent leadership.

You request *entirely* too much of my imagination, friend. 🤣

Rikard's avatar

Quoth my wife:

"Why can't you ever predict something good/nice happening?!"

I should have made Kassandrikard my online nickname...

pobrecollie's avatar

You would need a good dose of psychedelics for a task like that.

Warmek's avatar

Man... I've taken quite a few in my time, and even in my *most* altered states, I don't think I've ever envisioned anything *that* wild! 🤣🤣🤣

AndyinBC's avatar

"Now imagine an EU with competent leadership"

I tried Buddy. I tried.

But I just can't get there!

Rikard's avatar

I deny any accusations of using the Hunter S. Thompson-method of imagination!

Vaxless's avatar

😂😂😂😂😂😂

Andrew Marsh's avatar

How so very delicious - quite 'Moorish'.

Fra Raymond's avatar

"Monitoring the situation" = I'm watching CNN 🤡

SCA's avatar

I sure hope Trump is hereby showing a sufficient number of young actual European guys that one can, in actual fact, "just do things," and time's been, you know, a-wasting. You yourself prove there's at least some of the necessary stock to call upon how you've faced grim circumstances with courage and wise strategy.

I'm not much of a Hegseth fan for what he himself is, but damn. He sure seems to know how to get the very best out of the men under his command.

And though I don't know if this move has been right, it's sure been something to wake up to this Saturday. I hadn't even turned on the TV yet when SimCom's email header in my inbox made my first mug of tea sort of unnecessary. This gonna be a lively year!

Mitch's avatar

"Eurocucks" would seem equally appropriate here too.

Mark L's avatar

That's pretty good

UnvaxxedCanadian's avatar

Drugs drugs drugs!!!!

The fact the country is full of oil and bauxite and is cozy with Russia, China and Iran…. No it’s definitely NOT THAT!!!!

Funny that Ukraine is soooo similar. And yesterday the ruskies just took control of the largest manganese deposit in the world.

GDH's avatar

Prediction: Maduro and wife will face a single criminal charge:

mortgage fraud.

Henrybowman's avatar

And will get off when it is discovered that the judge the administration assigned to try them is in fact a defrocked Scientologist auditor who was never appropriately sworn in.

Johannes S. Herbst's avatar

On judge Neapolitano they said one of the charges is possessing machine guns which is prohibited by an (already revoked) US law from 1937. And of course being a drug boss.

Henrybowman's avatar

It's only 1/3, but this is so far the stupidest charge I have heard this year.

Are we pretending that US law makes machine gun possession illegal for anyone anywhere in the world? Including national sovereigns?

It's almost as if the new kindler, gentler, "second-amendment friendly DOJ" had a meeting to determine how they could possibly piss off their supporters in the American gun community any harder than they already have done.

Chris's avatar

GDH… that was good, i actually LOL’d!

Mary Sholl's avatar

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣Them and the UN. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Kevin Beck's avatar

To Kaja Kallas (if that is her real name): You yap about respecting international laws and the United Nations Charter. Well, I will inform you that the Monroe Doctrine precedes the UN Charter, so you can stick that idea where Ursula's butt will hurt.

mary-lou's avatar

thank you, most apt. here's Russia's TASS reporting - "...Aggression condemnation, fallout: global reaction to US operation in Venezuela [....] In the statements of the leaders and foreign ministries of several countries, Washington's action is characterized as aggression and an attempt to change power in the country..." - https://tass.com/world/2068203

Keith's avatar

And your point is that if TASS is reporting this intervention as 'aggression', then it must have been a bad thing? How about if the state-run media of Iran said this was an act of aggression? Would that make it doubly bad?

The only thing America could do to get on the good side of those regimes is to either take their side or always do nothing, which seems to be what many here are advocating.

mary-lou's avatar

TASS reports how various countries have reacted. thank you for (not) reading it.

Keith's avatar

You're very welcome.

Johannes S. Herbst's avatar

After she was not able to govern a country with one and an half million, she got apointed as the foreign minister of 400 million EU citizens.

Suzie's avatar

There’s a lot to love about this operation, not least of which is that the Trump administration managed to pull it off without telling virtually anyone who wasn’t directly involved - hence, none of those “mysterious” leaks.

So while the rest of the entire world is left appearing flat footed and flailing, Trump just cornered the market on the largest oil reserves in the world, and liberated an entire nation from a murderous tyrannical dictator.

Not bad for a day’s (several months in the planning) work.

Warmek's avatar

It *was* an impressively untelegraphed operation, at that.

Henrybowman's avatar

Hakeem Jeffries has entered the chat.

(Blocked...)

pobrecollie's avatar

There must have been a fair few Venezuelans involved as well. There appears to have been no pushback.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

I’m sure he’s knowledgeable in the need for surprise. He also knows he can’t trust Congress. The strike would never. happen if anyone had a minute’s notice.

Vaxless's avatar

Talk about filling up the tank ! 😂

EppingBlogger's avatar

I am surprised anyone is surprised.

The USA has ascerted extra territorial jurisdiction when it identifies breaches of its own laws by people elsewhere, mainly when it considers its own interests have been damaged. It applies in commercial and regular criminal affairs.

It does not matter whether you agree with this concept but clearly the EU and ECHR do believe in exactly the same principal. The ECJ and ECHR invent laws and apply them to people and businesses and governments which have never agreed to them. Indeed, in that respect, the US arrangement is better because at least there the laws are made and enforced by due process.

The UN was established on the basis of certain rules being accepoted by all its members and Permanent Members of the Security Council were called upon to ensure compliance. Givcen the outrageous breach of the requirement for fair and democratic elections the USA would be amply justified in helping the people of Venezuela. Perhaps they could help in the EU where unelected officials have overturned member state governments.

Warmek's avatar

> Perhaps they could help in the EU where unelected officials have overturned member state governments.

Maybe that's what the Eurocrats are afraid of...

pobrecollie's avatar

Please liberate us from these tyranical dictators Drumpf!

Michelle Dostie's avatar

The Venezuelan one time Dictator Maduro, now the head of a cartel that works with China, Iran, Russia to destroy the people of the USA with poisons they manufacture and deliver to the US via another cartel. Let’s just sayMaduro is no leader of any nation and he is no ally, no neighbor, and no friend. It is a relief to know he is on our soil, incarcerated.

pobrecollie's avatar

What's the evidence for this? (it sounds like Neocon propaganda to justify this kidnapping).

Michelle Dostie's avatar

Nothing neocon. Justice.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

The Justice Department had an indictment (warrant for arrest) for 10 years). Our President offered him exile in many places but if he didn’t accept, he would take him to the NYC COURT via helicopter. Maduro didn’t believe him, so he is now incarcerated in Brooklyn.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

I’m not sure what evidence you a questioning.

pobrecollie's avatar

Head of a cartel that works with China, Russia, Iran.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

China and other Central American cartels. Each has its job. Maduro was indicted for this years ago and is incarcerated in NYC now.

BARRY ISAACS's avatar

Historically this has been known as an application of the Monroe Doctrine. So now it may be called by some as the Donroe Doctrine.

Michelle Dostie's avatar

It’s being called by it’s historic name, the Monroe Doctrine and implemented as same.

John Lester's avatar

Gee if we did this so easily, getting the Eurotards in Brussels would be a walk in the park. That is probably what they are upset about. Trump did not devote his life to climbing the party ladder, so he is not tied to any dogma other than his own.

I just saw a shot story about WW2 that kind of applies. It was March 1945, Montgomery and the British planned a massive crossing of the Rhine but were still planning it and waiting for the right moment. George Patton and his 3rd Army were south of them, discovered the Rhine was not protected in his area, built a pontoon bridge and moved his whole army across in three days. Montgomery was very upset because Patton's move was not approved. Wanted Patton fired. Eisenhower thought about it but decided that ending the war sooner with fewer casualties allowed unauthorized movement by a commander when the situation was right.

Trump and Patton would have gotten along quite well I think.