I don't really know what to say at this point.
As far as the legality of what we did, I don't see a problem with it (at least I don't think so). The United States should be able to steamroll some random guy in Grenada or Venezuela if we feel like he's a bad actor. International law and the ICC is a bad joke and shouldn't constrain our behavior. Domestically, the War Powers resolution should allow the executive to do something like this.
The problem is, why are we doing this? And who is "we"? I have never seen convincing evidence that removing Maduro will reduce the flow of drugs into the US, or that it will remove communism from the country. As far as the oil, if Exxon Mobil or whoever is able to drill in Venezuelan oilfields now, that's great for them, but how does it benefit the rest of us? For some reason, I don't think Americans will get anything out of this.
The drug angle is especially stupid because Trump just pardoned another South American head of state (Juan Hernandez) who is on tape wanting to "shove cocaine up the noses of gringos."
The only country that tangibly benefits, at this point, is Israel, given that Venezuela has been a known and acknowledged thorn in their side for years. It's no surprise that the next presidential hopeful Maria Machado will not shut up about how many things she's ready to do for them.
Some people are alleging that China and Russia were establishing a foothold in our backyard with Venezuela. They do indeed supply some oil to China (2-5% of China's supply) but I haven't heard of any other involvement, certainly nothing substantial enough to warrant regime change.
I also have a problem with the example this is setting globally. We are going to charge a foreign head of state with possession of machine guns? So when Germany brings an American citizen up on charges for violating their hate speech laws are we going to pretend we're better than that? Are we still going to pretend that Russia invading Ukraine was unjustified?
If Maduro was repeatedly aggressing on the US and uniting himself with China/Russia, I don't think I have a problem with this. But I just don't see it.
I was talking about this.
https://scored.co/c/KotakuInAction2/p/19BZbdlyyW/iran-was-an-iq-test-you-favorite/c
You might have forgotten, but you commented in that thread.
Ah, I see. Now I do remember. Even there, I'm not sure if he's just shilling for Trump by calling his critics that very clever label of Panicans (which is stupid in its own right, but not solid evidence that he's warmongering).
Why? After 10 days of Trump's blithering idiocy, I was relieved that the strike was as limited as it was. They moved the Overton Window so far that the previously unthinkably reckless became the 'moderate' course. In an alternative universe, I can imagine myself saying: "Look guys, this wasn't great, but let's look at it from the bright side - it was a very small strike, and people who lost faith in Trump were wrong."
It's quite dismaying how many anti-Iran war are now pro-Venezuela war. Even most people here don't seem to know what to think, in one thread I see pro-war upvoted, in the other anti-war (though that may just be because I'm obnoxious, but I was equally obnoxious during Iran).
It's because the Iran war was far removed from the US and much more obviously all about Israel. Dumbasses are falling for the Monroe Doctrine, sphere of influence garbage, and even some "anti-semites" like Nick Fuentes are shilling for Trump's actions on Venezuela. Ben Shapiro has openly talked about how the Venezuela situation can be used to sell people on more action against Iran, by the way.
Not surprising. I think this also wouldn't have happened if Trump wasn't praised for that idiotic bombing of Iran. That is the danger when a military strike doesn't end in disaster... it sets you up for a greater disaster.