Can we please not?

[Wilson23]

No one has yet mentioned any good reason for this war -- or even why it would be better to win it than to lose it.

 

[Wilson23]

Heating up, apparently.

 

[Wilson23]

"Trump suggests US hit ‘big facility’ in Venezuela drug fightt" -- but details are kinda vague.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-suggests-us-hit-big-facility-latin-america-drug-fight

 

[DeluxAuto]

The US is not going to “war” with Venezuela.

How many deep of rum & egg nogs were you when you posted this on Christmas instead of enjoying your grandchildren?

 

[Wilson23]

Don't suppose there's any way to reverse course, now.

 

[Wilson23]

It is always better to avoid a war than to win it, providing the price of avoiding it is not too high -- that is always a political judgment.

The U.S. does not need a war with Venezuela. We have nothing to gain by it. They pose no threat to us, economic or strategic or political. They are not the center of a spreading wave of revolutionary leftism. They are not a part of America's drug problem -- cocaine is not produced in Venezuela, and what is shipped through is mostly bound for Europe, let them deal with it if they want to.

The invasion of Iraq turned into a prolonged, bloody, expensive quagmire. What reason do we have to believe things would go any better in Venezuela?

Does not every word of the above still appear true?

 

[Wilson23]

If it's about drugs, that's a whole REGIONAL war -- we would have to invade Colombia and Bolivia and Peru to deal with the problem effectively.

 

[NeonSubtlety]

If it's about drugs, that's a whole REGIONAL war -- we would have to invade Colombia and Bolivia and Peru to deal with the problem effectively.

So…step one?

The Venezuelan people are routinely ranked in the bottom 10, among all counties, when it comes to personal, financial, and political freedoms. Even if you don’t trust the reasons, Maduro is a terrible leader. This is an opportunity to deliver food to hungry people, democracy to those who haven’t had a meaningful vote in decades, and control a black market undermining sanctions that we all agree with.

 

[Wilson23]

So…step one?

The Venezuelan people are routinely ranked in the bottom 10, among all counties, when it comes to personal, financial, and political freedoms. Even if you don’t trust the reasons, Maduro is a terrible leader. This is an opportunity to deliver food to hungry people, democracy to those who haven’t had a meaningful vote in decades, and control a black market undermining sanctions that we all agree with.

But they're not doing anything we cannot afford to tolerate. Better to avoid a war than to win it.

 

[NeonSubtlety]

But they're not doing anything we cannot afford to tolerate. Better to avoid a war than to win it.

Agree to disagree? I get there’s a line. You can’t involve yourself in all the world’s problems. But something like half of Venezuela has left in the past 10 years; it’s terrible. And, moreover, many are already in America (which is why you’re seeing so many social media posts celebrating this).

If we can send people back home, where they want to go to, and say that we’ve made that home better for them…what’s the problem?

 

[Wilson23]

Agree to disagree? I get there’s a line. You can’t involve yourself in all the world’s problems. But something like half of Venezuela has left in the past 10 years; it’s terrible. And, moreover, many are already in America (which is why you’re seeing so many social media posts celebrating this).

If we can send people back home, where they want to go to, and say that we’ve made that home better for them…what’s the problem?

The problem is war. The problem is loss of blood and treasure on both sides. The problem is the very real risk of an Iraq-scale quagmire. The problem is reviving an old kind of IDEOLOGICAL war, the U.S. against a quasi-socialist regime, at a time when socialism still has widespread appeal in Latin America, to the point that guerillas willing to fight in a leftist cause would never be difficult to find.

But don't worry -- American forces can always handle a war against leftist guerillas in tropical jungles.

 

[NeonSubtlety]

The problem is war. The problem is loss of blood and treasure on both sides. The problem is the very real risk of an Iraq-scale quagmire. The problem is reviving an old kind of IDEOLOGICAL war, the U.S. against a quasi-socialist regime, at a time when socialism still has widespread appeal in Latin America, to the point that guerillas willing to fight in a leftist cause would never be difficult to find.

Iraq is kind of the success story when it comes to middle-eastern intervention, believe it or not. They’ve engaged in elections, with various degrees of legitimacy, every year since we removed Hussein. They have a constitition. Personal and civil liberties have increased. Tolerance for women and minorities has increased. No, they didn’t become democratic overnight, after hundreds of years of theocratic rule. But they’re incrementally becoming more democratic. And their people are benefitting as a result.

Is it worth the lives? The financial cost to Americans? The trouble? I tend to land on the side of “yes.” The math is, of course, different for those who die or who have known those who paid the ultimate price for the endeavor to raise up those that are truly suffering. But, we’ve championed it in many past military conflicts — sacrifice for the good of others. I’m still there. When I think about the lives most others live in comparison to my own, I’m not at all offended by my taxes being higher to try and raise up others around the world. As a 40-something dude, I might’ve felt differently if I was asked to serve for the purpose, and so I’ll never call someone wrong who is opposed to doing so. But, money? Yeah; I’m on board.

 

[Wilson23]

Iraq is kind of the success story when it comes to middle-eastern intervention, believe it or not. They’ve engaged in elections, with various degrees of legitimacy, every year since we removed Hussein. They have a constitition. Personal and civil liberties have increased. Tolerance for women and minorities has increased. No, they didn’t become democratic overnight, after hundreds of years of theocratic rule. But they’re incrementally becoming more democratic. And their people are benefitting as a result.

Is it worth the lives? The financial cost to Americans? The trouble? I tend to land on the side of “yes.” The math is, of course, different for those who die or who have known those who paid the ultimate price for the endeavor to raise up those that are truly suffering. But, we’ve championed it in many past military conflicts — sacrifice for the good of others. I’m still there. When I think about the lives most others live in comparison to my own, I’m not at all offended by my taxes being higher to try and raise up others around the world. As a 40-something dude, I might’ve felt differently if I was asked to serve for the purpose, and so I’ll never call someone wrong who is opposed to doing so. But, money? Yeah; I’m on board.

But we dangerously destabilized the whole region. We made ISIS possible and everything else. Similar things could easily happen in Latin America. The risk is not worth it.