@lowfour wrote in post #210:
Recuerdas a Jesús Gil en la bañera con las cadenas de oro y una copa de cava cutre en la mano y presentando un programa?PUES ESO. Versión gringa.
sisisisi!! ostia, clavao!!
oro (fake, ya vimos), cutrez y panza
pero dárselas de mandamás como si fueras un califa, ni cotiza
A ver la editorial del NYT hoy lo dice clarito:
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/03/opinion/venezuela-attack-trump-us.html
Over the past few months, President Trump has deployed an imposing military force in the Caribbean to threaten Venezuela. Until recently, the president used that force — an aircraft carrier, at least seven other warships, scores of aircraft and 15,000 U.S. troops — for illegal attacks on small boats that he claimed were ferrying drugs. On Saturday, Mr. Trump dramatically escalated his campaign by capturing President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela as part of what he called “a large scale strike” against the country.
Few people will feel any sympathy for Mr. Maduro. He is undemocratic and repressive, and has destabilized the Western Hemisphere in recent years. The United Nations recently issued a report detailing more than a decade of killings, torture, sexual violence and arbitrary detention by henchmen against his political opponents. He stole Venezuela’s presidential election in 2024. He has fueled economic and political disruption throughout the region by instigating an exodus of nearly eight million migrants.
If there is an overriding lesson of American foreign affairs in the past century, however, it is that attempting to oust even the most deplorable regime can make matters worse. The United States spent 20 years failing to create a stable government in Afghanistan and replaced a dictatorship in Libya with a fractured state. The tragic consequences of the 2003 war in Iraq continue to beset America and the Middle East. Perhaps most relevant, the United States has sporadically destabilized Latin American countries, including Chile, Cuba, Guatemala and Nicaragua, by trying to oust a government through force.
Despite this history, Mr. Trump seemed to commit the United States to a nation-building project in Venezuela. “We are going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition,” he said in a news conference on Saturday. He offered almost no details. He has not even offered a coherent explanation for his actions in Venezuela. If Mr. Trump wants to make the case for an invasion and a takeover of another country, the Constitution spells out what he must do: Go to Congress. Without congressional approval, his actions violate U.S. law.
The nominal rationale for the administration’s military adventurism is to destroy “narco-terrorists.” Governments throughout history have labeled the leaders of rival nations as terrorists, seeking to justify military incursions as policing operations. The claim is particularly ludicrous in this case, given that Venezuela is not a meaningful producer of fentanyl or the other drugs that have dominated the recent epidemic of overdoses in the United States, and the cocaine that it does produce flows mostly to Europe. While Mr. Trump has been attacking Venezuelan boats, he also pardoned Juan Orlando Hernández, who ran a sprawling drug operation when he was president of Honduras from 2014 to 2022.
Sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter Get expert analysis of the news and a guide to the big ideas shaping the world every weekday morning. Get it sent to your inbox.
A more plausible explanation for the attacks on Venezuela may instead be found in Mr. Trump’s recently released National Security Strategy. It claimed the right to dominate Latin America: “After years of neglect, the United States will reassert and enforce the Monroe Doctrine to restore American pre-eminence in the Western Hemisphere.” In what the document called the “Trump Corollary,” the administration vowed to redeploy forces from around the world to the region, stop traffickers on the high seas, use lethal force against migrants and drug runners and potentially base more U.S. troops around the region.
Venezuela has apparently become the first country subject to this latter-day imperialism, and it represents a dangerous and illegal approach to America’s place in the world. By proceeding without any semblance of international legitimacy, valid legal authority or domestic endorsement, Mr. Trump risks providing justification for authoritarians in China, Russia and elsewhere who want to dominate their own neighbors. More immediately, he threatens to replicate the American hubris that led to the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
As a presidential candidate, Mr. Trump seemed to recognize the problems with military overreach. In 2016, he was the rare Republican politician to call out the folly of President George W. Bush’s Iraq war. In 2024, he said: “I’m not going to start a war. I’m going to stop wars.”
He is now abandoning this principle, and he is doing so illegally. The Constitution requires Congress to approve any act of war. Yes, presidents often push the boundaries of this law. But even Mr. Bush sought and received congressional endorsement for his Iraq invasion, and presidents since Mr. Bush have justified their use of drone attacks against terrorist groups and their supporters with a 2001 law that authorized action after the Sept. 11 attacks. Mr. Trump has not even a fig leaf of legal authority for his attacks on Venezuela.
Congressional debates over military action play a crucial democratic role. They check military adventurism by forcing a president to justify his attack plans to the public and requiring members of Congress to tie their own credibility to those plans. For years after the vote on the Iraq war, Democrats who supported Mr. Bush, including Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, paid a political price, while those who criticized the war, like Bernie Sanders and Barack Obama, came to be seen as prophetic.
In the case of Venezuela, a congressional debate would expose the thinness of Mr. Trump’s rationale. His administration has justified his attacks on the small boats by claiming they pose an immediate threat to the United States. But a wide range of legal and military experts reject the claim, and common sense refutes it, too. An attempt to smuggle drugs into the United States — if, in fact, all the boats were doing so — is not an attempt to overthrow the government or defeat its military.
We suspect Mr. Trump has refused to seek congressional approval for his actions partly because he knows that even some Republicans in Congress are deeply skeptical of the direction in which he is leading this country. Before the recent seizure of Mr. Maduro, Senators Rand Paul and Lisa Murkowski and Representatives Don Bacon and Thomas Massie — Republicans all — backed legislation that would limit Mr. Trump’s military actions against Venezuela.
A second argument against Mr. Trump’s attacks on Venezuela is that they violate international law. By blowing up the small boats that Mr. Trump says are smuggling drugs, he has killed people based on the mere suspicion that they have committed a crime and given them no chance to defend themselves. The Geneva Conventions of 1949 and every subsequent major human rights treaty prohibit such extrajudicial killings. So does U.S. law.
The administration appears to have killed defenseless people. In one attack, the Navy fired a second strike against a hobbled boat, about 40 minutes after the first attack, killing two sailors who were clinging to the boat’s wreckage and appeared to present no threat. As our colleague David French, a former U.S. Army lawyer, has written, “The thing that separates war from murder is the law.”
Advertisement
The legal arguments against Mr. Trump’s actions are the more important ones, but there is also a cold-eyed realist argument. They are not in America’s national security interest. The closest thing to an encouraging analogy is President George H.W. Bush’s invasion of Panama 36 years ago last month, which drove the dictator Manuel Noriega from power and helped set Panama on a path toward democracy. Yet Venezuela is different in important ways. Panama is a much smaller country, and it was a country where American officials and troops had operated for decades because of the Panama Canal.
The potential for chaos in Venezuela seems much greater. The generals who enabled Mr. Maduro’s regime will not suddenly vanish. Nor are they likely to hand power to María Corina Machado, the opposition figure whose movement appears to have won the country’s most recent election and who accepted the Nobel Peace Prize last month.
Among the possible bad outcomes are a surge in violence by a left-wing Colombian military group, the ELN, which has a foothold in Venezuela’s western area, or by the paramilitary groups known as “colectivos” that have operated on the periphery of power under the Maduro dictatorship. Further unrest in Venezuela could unsettle global energy and food markets and drive more migrants throughout the hemisphere.
So how should the United States deal with the continuing problem that Venezuela poses to the region and America’s interests? We share the hopes of desperate Venezuelans, some of whom have made a case for intervention. But there are no easy answers. By now, the world should understand the risks of regime change.
We will hold out hope that the current crisis will end less badly than we expect. We fear that the result of Mr. Trump’s adventurism is increased suffering for Venezuelans, rising regional instability and lasting damage for America’s interests around the world. We know that Mr. Trump’s warmongering violates the law.
yo es que creo que van a "explotar" al trucho estos 3-4 meses que le queden antes de declararle "gagá" total y apartarle
es lo que hicieron con bruce willis, cuando ya sabían de su demencia frontotemporal pero no era público aun, hizo pelis a cascoporro, deleznables la mayoría, por exprimir hasta la última gota de su "aura" de tipo duro o algo así
para cuando quieran llevarle ante un juzgado o loquesea, estará o fiambre o incapacitado
lo que no sé si podrán juzgar a la cadena de mando o algo así, por eso estaban los generales como "ausentes" de la war-room y diciendo que ellos habían hecho un arresto siguiendo órdenes del departamento de justicia... (ya, majete, pero seguir órdenes ilegales no te libra del trullo)
si el de la cia es "leal" y en el pentagono no hay una masa crítica de "purgados" suficiente, lo mismo hasta vemos cosas que nunca creeríamos (como lo de secuestrar a platanote, no me lo creía hasta que lo vi)
en fin, no adelantemos acontecimientos, porque esta mañana ya ha dicho el trucho que quiere groenlandia, cuba y colombia... ah, y mexico
jajajaja, menudo imbécil
esto es lo que comentábamos ayer, que con clinton o el bush hubieran dicho; DEMOCRACIA O BOMBAS o algo así
ahora es; o nos dais el petroleo o bombas
al lowfour le parecerá que es lo de siempre, pero no, no lo es
de hecho, es hasta raro, porque antes se intervenía militarmente "de facto" en el país y se ponía personal gringo al mando y cosas así
aquí no, aquí tenemos un personal "corrupto" del antiguo régimen que se supone tiene que obedecer órdenes de otro régimen extranjero aun más corrupto bajo amenazas de violencia
venganomejodas
Por supuesto que no es normal. Es la doctrina Monroe, mezclada con la desfachatez rusa, mezclada con el integrismo del ISIS, mezclado con Jesús Gil, mezclado con un frenopático.
Hoy escuchaba otro podcast de geopolítica, con el Corresponsal Jefe en la Casa Blanca del NYT, y básicamente ha dicho que el nivel de aprobación del truchismo es casi negativo, una cosa demencial, pero que Trump actúa como si fuera Paulie en el video de arriba y encima tiene control absoluto de su partido. Pero que en las elecciones de este año puede empezar a haber ostias.
Decía que miente con la inflación, que era buena con Biden y se ha disparado con el gordo. Decía que la creación de empleo el año pasado en un trimestre fue de 1.5M de curros... y este mismo trimestre ha sido de 0.5M, es decir 2/3 menos! Que la ostia va a ser de campeonato, porque además quién va a invertir en USA si no sabes lo que te va costar, con cambios caprichosos, peticiones y extorsiones. Que eso de llevar fábricas a USA no se lo cree ni el tato.
Total que mientras contaba lo de la aprobación en picado... he pensado... CLARO, el Putin ha cortado el flujo de Oswaldianos Ciberputis hablando bien de Trump!
Recuerda el giro del Oswaldo local, primero que Trump era la ostia... y de repente que Trump era una mierda y tal. Lo recuerdas? Yo si.
Le chantajea así con lo de la paz... "Que no tragas con esto? Te reviento las encuestas".
Lo veo CLARÍSIMO!!!!
no olvidemos que caracas es central ciberputi, no llamamos oswaldo al oswaldo por capricho (un poco sí, pero esto es otra historia)
en la superficie quieren el petróleo, claro, pero y las granjas ciberputis?
sea como sea, tenemos ya hilo sobre la galleta gringo-trucha y el reich trucho de los mil años igual ni a mil días llega
BEIJING, Jan 5 (Reuters) - China's top diplomat accused the U.S. of acting like a "world judge" by seizing Venezuela's leader Nicolas Maduro to put him on trial in New York, with Beijing set to confront Washington at the United Nations over the move's legality.
Beijing follows a policy of non-intervention and routinely criticises military activity conducted without the UN Security Council's approval.
ojo con china que nos veo "alineados" con los chinorris y todo, eh?? venganomejodas
eurasia orwelliana
No me jodas, que en 1984 caían los drones todo el puto día en plan V1, la tele te espiaba y había que desgañitarse en el Minute of Hate!
Lo que se dice un coñazo total.
bueno, si gobierna en venezuela por qué deja a la delcy que tome el control?
no sé, igual es que lo que quiere decir es que controla a la delcy esa... "a la sombra", pero estas manifestaciones la ponen "al sol"
a mí me parece que todo esto es otra "operación" (especial o ya casi "habitual") para tener el foco en el wetnoodle y que no se le vega abajo el ego
no hay mucho más
al final del día, en venezuela mandan los bolivarianos (hasta donde sabemos, no hay gringos dando órdenes o algo así) y el trucho parlotea en plan "soy napoleon" a punto de ser internado en un asilo
Me lo creo
Bueno que no hemos puesto que esta noche ha habido tiros en el palacio presidencial
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1q5475y/militarycolumnenroutetothe_presidential/
Dicen que un drone que no se que, pero tiros ha habido.
Calma cero.
Control cero.
Donaldo Trumpo Presidento Imaginario.
Please log in to reply to this discussion.
Log In