Absolutely nailed the strategic calculus here. The nuclear deterrence paradox is pretty wild when you think about it, we've basically created a system where the only real sovereignty insurance is the weapon we're supposedly trying to eliminate. I remeber reading about Gaddafi's disarmament deal and thinking it was a smart diplomatic move at the time, but hindsight makes that look kinda naive now. The "might makes right" framing hits harder thn it should because there's really no institutional check left that Washington respects.
Agree totally with the sentiment that trying to emphasize that MADURO IS BAD AND EVIL BUT YOU DIDN'T FOLLOW THE RULES just makes Democrats look weaker. Liberals are quick to signal that they have the same foreign policy views as the US state department, but just don't like that Trump was effective and took action. It doesn't make them come across as being serious, it comes across as contradictory and weak.
The only way someone can think that statement is good is if they live in the Washington echo chamber. They try to check all the boxes by saying 'Maduro Bad' so the press doesn't criticize them. But all it does is show they're easily manipulated and scared of their own shadow.
I've been anti-nukes since I was old enough to understand what it meant (so, since the '70s) but I agree with what you've said here:
"Nuclear proliferation is a net-negative for society. Every atomic weapon makes the world a more dangerous place. When nukes are around, minor regional conflicts become potential mass casualty events. But the peaceful world we seek and what nations do when faced with immediate threats are two very different things."
I think this is where a lot of folks get lost. What we would like in an ideal world (no nukes) is very different from what rational actors will do (get nukes for protection). I find Americans of all political persuasions try to judge other nations' behavior from an American viewpoint, which doesn't work.
Sometimes you have to give the devil his due. The Trump administration has found a novel way of running a foreign country without actually occupying it. We invaded but left no sizable military force which negates the possibility of US casualties. We did not topple the Venezuelan government nor do we have plans of restoring democracy. We run the country through threats of violence. The anti-Chavist opposition is in a pickle now. It has been betrayed by the nation it thought was backing it. Does it now become the anti-imperialist opposition and starting shouting Yankee Go Home? How long can Delcy Rodriguez maintain the fiction of being the anti-imperialist while also taking orders from Trump?
I'm surprised by the complete lack of a plan from the White House. They keep flip-flopping on who is in charge of Venezuela, what they want the US-VZ relationship to be, and what they are doing next. It's clear they thought capturing Maduro was cool (Trump wants to best Obama's "Bin Laden" moment) and never considered what would come next. The dog caught the car.
I Think China should install Nuclear Weapons in “ Every country” with a trigger in China to activate them if they are attacked by USA, zionist Israel, or The Saudi’s. Done‼️no more threatening weaker countries no more dominance by warmonger destructive countries that are destroying the planet at the same time these bombs never should have ben‼️ No reasonable minds have ever made decisions about war or destruction‼️‼️
Absolutely nailed the strategic calculus here. The nuclear deterrence paradox is pretty wild when you think about it, we've basically created a system where the only real sovereignty insurance is the weapon we're supposedly trying to eliminate. I remeber reading about Gaddafi's disarmament deal and thinking it was a smart diplomatic move at the time, but hindsight makes that look kinda naive now. The "might makes right" framing hits harder thn it should because there's really no institutional check left that Washington respects.
Not only does Washington not respect any norm, but they're openly stating they don't intend to!
Agree totally with the sentiment that trying to emphasize that MADURO IS BAD AND EVIL BUT YOU DIDN'T FOLLOW THE RULES just makes Democrats look weaker. Liberals are quick to signal that they have the same foreign policy views as the US state department, but just don't like that Trump was effective and took action. It doesn't make them come across as being serious, it comes across as contradictory and weak.
The only way someone can think that statement is good is if they live in the Washington echo chamber. They try to check all the boxes by saying 'Maduro Bad' so the press doesn't criticize them. But all it does is show they're easily manipulated and scared of their own shadow.
If any country needs it, it's Palestine.
preach
I've been anti-nukes since I was old enough to understand what it meant (so, since the '70s) but I agree with what you've said here:
"Nuclear proliferation is a net-negative for society. Every atomic weapon makes the world a more dangerous place. When nukes are around, minor regional conflicts become potential mass casualty events. But the peaceful world we seek and what nations do when faced with immediate threats are two very different things."
I think this is where a lot of folks get lost. What we would like in an ideal world (no nukes) is very different from what rational actors will do (get nukes for protection). I find Americans of all political persuasions try to judge other nations' behavior from an American viewpoint, which doesn't work.
Yep for sure. I became more nuanced in my thinking in recent years because of the examples of Libya and North Korea, which you pointed out here.
Sometimes you have to give the devil his due. The Trump administration has found a novel way of running a foreign country without actually occupying it. We invaded but left no sizable military force which negates the possibility of US casualties. We did not topple the Venezuelan government nor do we have plans of restoring democracy. We run the country through threats of violence. The anti-Chavist opposition is in a pickle now. It has been betrayed by the nation it thought was backing it. Does it now become the anti-imperialist opposition and starting shouting Yankee Go Home? How long can Delcy Rodriguez maintain the fiction of being the anti-imperialist while also taking orders from Trump?
I'm surprised by the complete lack of a plan from the White House. They keep flip-flopping on who is in charge of Venezuela, what they want the US-VZ relationship to be, and what they are doing next. It's clear they thought capturing Maduro was cool (Trump wants to best Obama's "Bin Laden" moment) and never considered what would come next. The dog caught the car.
The plan is to extract wealth. That's always the plan. Everyone is focused on the oil but there are many ways to extract wealth from a nation.
I Think China should install Nuclear Weapons in “ Every country” with a trigger in China to activate them if they are attacked by USA, zionist Israel, or The Saudi’s. Done‼️no more threatening weaker countries no more dominance by warmonger destructive countries that are destroying the planet at the same time these bombs never should have ben‼️ No reasonable minds have ever made decisions about war or destruction‼️‼️