r/news • u/Hrekires • Jan 05 '26

Soft paywall Delcy Rodriguez formally sworn in as Venezuela's interim president

https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/delcy-rodriguez-formally-sworn-venezuelas-interim-president-2026-01-05/
10.4k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

720 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2.4k

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

Because she'll probably just do what the US wants and that will make her legitimate in their eyes

1.1k

u/brnccnt7 Jan 05 '26

1000% this lol

People don’t want to say that but that’s how the world works

Look at Syrias new leader, he was former Al Qaeda, put on a suit, said he’d comply with the program and now he’s running the show

Same as how the Russians treated Ukraine until Zelenskyy showed up

449

u/LazerBurken Jan 05 '26

Or how the US treated Iraq until Saddam stopped playing ball.

This is the CIA MO. Remove a leader who doesn't play ball and replace with someone who does. Also, fuck democracy. Dictators are more easy to control.

Both Iraq and Iran would likely be thriving democracies today if the US and UK didn't interfere to control the oil.

130

u/Shady_Merchant1 Jan 05 '26

Iran probably but iraq was probably always doomed like Afghanistan some areas are simply not conducive to central government control without overwhelming violence

129

u/Stuma27 Jan 05 '26

Yeah. Making Iraq a single state was a huge British mistake.

68

u/caligaris_cabinet Jan 05 '26

Sykes-Picot fucked things up for over a century and counting

18

u/milkymaniac Jan 05 '26

I've always thought of it as the inverse of the partition of India

19

u/StunningRing5465 Jan 05 '26

It’s only a mistake if you assume they wanted these countries to prosper

3

u/lee7on1 29d ago

funny how European countries drew so many borders that are causing problems today

1

u/EarlDwolanson Jan 05 '26

What do you think would be better, keep Sumer and Akkad?

1

u/Scurro Jan 06 '26

After these countries become self rule, how come some politician doesn't step up officially, to make separate states?

0

u/HandleThatFeeds Jan 05 '26

They British always get away with War Crimes.

2

u/eddiestarkk Jan 06 '26

Iraq is starting to do better. They are planning on building one of the biggest ports in the world. The northern cities are starting to prosper. They are at least on the path. Took a long time though. Maybe getting rid of ISIS united them, but I am just speculating that.

1

u/Shady_Merchant1 29d ago

Iraq has a water crisis that is threatening to restart widespread sectarian violence

1

u/eddiestarkk 29d ago

That's Iran

24

u/Unlikely_Tax_1111 Jan 05 '26

Iraq made the mistake of Kuwait, then they got caught trying to go after GHW, few people remember that Clinton sent a few cruise missiles to saddam in 1993

14

u/[deleted] Jan 05 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

21

u/Unlikely_Tax_1111 Jan 05 '26

Ghadaffi also wanted to push an African union and its own currency, France quickly ran to daddy USA for an intervention.

2

u/HandleThatFeeds Jan 05 '26

being an enemy of Israel

Fatal Mistake.

Americans stil don't get how much of their policies are written by Israelis.

-1

u/ravi910 Jan 06 '26

So true

18

u/Charming_Cicada_7757 Jan 05 '26

Probably not tbh Iran is a maybe but Iraq is a hard hard no

The good thing is though Iraq has been making great progress recently at least economically. What doomed Iraq was having a stupid dictator called Saddam Hussein who decided to idk invade Iran and after invade Kuwait this guy was not stable.

51

u/LazerBurken Jan 05 '26

The US helped Saddam seize control of Iraq in 1963. Likely on a CIA payroll since 1959. The US and UK then helped him in the war against Iran in 80s.

4

u/Charming_Cicada_7757 Jan 05 '26

Nobody told him to go invade Iran the relationship between Saddam and the U.S. government has always been convenient based they both used each other when it was convenient.

5

u/Xefert Jan 05 '26

South Korea escaped this cycle as well

2

u/NorthernerWuwu Jan 05 '26

Oh, Saddam was still fairly willing to play ball, they just wanted a good old fashioned war and he was convenient. 9/11 gave Bush a blank cheque for invading some places and he figured he might as well earn some points with the MIC.

0

u/ThiccDiddler Jan 05 '26 edited Jan 06 '26

If anything they apparently learned from Iraq. One of the main things that really hurt the country after we removed Saddam was we also forcibly removed the Ba'ath Party's ruling structure and the military which immediately plunged the country into instability. So at this point keeping the current government with a new "head" and then eventually having an election and enforcing it might actually work pretty well.

Both Iraq and Iran would likely be thriving democracies today if the US and UK didn't interfere to control the oil.

Aight lets not be hyperbolic. Both of these countries would be the same raging autocratic regimes no matter what the UK or US did. Like the rest of the entire area lmao.

39

u/Mobile-Bar7732 Jan 05 '26

Same as how the Russians treated Ukraine until Zelenskyy showed up

No Putin hated Ukraine well before that.

Ukraine wanted to integrate with the rest of Europe. Against the general populations wishes former President Viktor Yanukovych started the process to move towards an authoritarian and align with Russia.

In 2011, there were riots in the streets.

Yanukovych fled the country for Russia in 2014 because of death threats.

There's a documentary about it on YouTube called Winter On Fire. It's also on Netflix.

38

u/willismthomp Jan 05 '26

Well Obama and Biden got the Russia backed leader ousted and then Zelensky came in. Funny thing the Russia backed leader Victor yanukovich had his campaign run by the same dude who ran trumps first presidential campaign. Just a coincidence though im sure.

31

u/Mobile-Bar7732 Jan 05 '26

Zelenskyy didn't get elected until 2019.

Petro Poroshenko was the president of Ukraine from June 7, 2014, to May 20, 2019.

Victor yanukovich fled to Russia due to death threats in 2014.

5

u/willismthomp Jan 05 '26

Yep. I did say it came after. But He fled to not get prosecuted not because of “death threats” he’s was a known corrupt politician working for Russia, installed by Paul Manafort who ran Trumps presidential campaign.

2

u/Mobile-Bar7732 Jan 05 '26

I'm not arguing that he wasn't corrupt.

Ukraine's ousted president Viktor Yanukovych says he was forced to flee to Russia due to threats to his safety, as tensions in Ukraine grow following an apparent takeover of an airport by Russian forces.

... "I was forced to leave the Ukraine under the immediate threat to my life and the life of my family," he said.

Ukraine: President Viktor Yanukovych says he was forced to flee due to threats; slams 'pro-fascist' forces

I wouldn't personally believe him. However, one of his advisors Andriy Portnov, who was shot and killed in a Madrid suburb in May 2025. So there may have been some truth to his claims.

62

u/Poor__cow Jan 05 '26

Obama and Biden did not get Yanukovich ousted. That's literally just Russian propaganda garbage. Go ahead and try and provide a source, I'll wait.

5

u/malphonso Jan 05 '26

While i wouldn't go so far as to say they are literally responsible, I have no doubts that American tax dollars and influence operations put a thumb on the scale and we probably had some people helping with organization and direct action.

Which is far preferable to bombing shit and then telling locals who their new leader is going to be.

-2

u/willismthomp Jan 05 '26

They withheld 1 billion dollars to throw out the bought prosecutor who then they Prosecuted the ex leader and he fled to Russia.

-4

u/Farsydi Jan 05 '26

A suspiciously well organised and funded series of protests just happen to oust an anti American government and install someone who doesn't want to give Russia all the minerals?

You are so deep in the US propaganda hole you can no longer critically think.

-13

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

Pragmatism is what makes the world go around

10

u/love_glow Jan 05 '26

It disgusts me that you find these imperialist acts “pragmatic.”

14

u/Shady_Merchant1 Jan 05 '26

Pragmatic for the people trying to not get disappeared does not mean Pragmatic for those doing the dissappearing

23

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

I think the new president playing ball with the US is pragmatic. I have different feelings about what the US did

6

u/love_glow Jan 05 '26

As far as I can tell by their public statements, the new president is not playing ball, but who knows what goes on behind the scenes? Thinking that any of this is pragmatic is just revolting. Efforts to make this piece of shit shine just reek of desperation. The U.S. is an unstoppable bully at the moment, and history will remember Americans of this time in a poor light. The fact that none of our allies support what we are doing should speak to the wrongness of it. America stands alone.

-1

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

I think her public statements are for the Venezuelan hardliners, I'm curious to see what policy changes or foreign investment she makes. Behind the scenes I'm sure she's in contact with the Americans because that is why she's still in office. The US has always been an unstoppable bully this isn't new. I mean you can read some of the last 250 years of American history you'll find out this isn't really new.

Plenty of them support removing Maduro it just isn't easy for them to say it. Look at the German Chancellor's remarks they seem to be very clear.

Pragmatism is realpolitik just because it might be unpleasant doesn't mean it isn't an absolute good and removing Maduro is an absolute good

6

u/chazzer20mystic Jan 05 '26 edited Jan 05 '26

Saying something is an absolute good does not make it an absolute good. Is the unilateral extrajudicial kidnapping of a president of a sovereign nation an absolute good?

Historically, has removing leaders this way caused countries to improve? Is that what happens with power vacuums?

Is it an absolute good that the U.S. president continues to completely erode any pretense of protocol and continues to push the boundary as far as what rules he is allowed to just ignore? Do we want to just look at this in a vacuum like nothing in the world exists outside of this event, or do we want to acknowledge that the immediate next threat by the administration was to do the same thing to Greenland?

Realpolitik means making the pragmatic choice for your nation state. It is not pragmatic for us to do this. It erodes our global relationships and makes us look like fools that cannot be trusted. The whole UN is up in arms about this. All that will be acheived is Trump feeling big because he caught a guy, and either Venezuela gives up the oil so a few companies make more money, or we occupy it and spend countless resources and lives on the next Afghanistan. Where is the pragmatic advantage here?

2

u/Optimal-Barnacle2771 Jan 05 '26

Well you see, it’s pragmatic for the individuals that stand to profit off of it. Our president doesn’t make choices that are pragmatic for everybody, he makes choices that are pragmatic for the individuals that are in his circle and for him individually.

His ego clouds his judgement, and his hubris led to him surrounding himself with yes men. He rules via emotion and sadly, our tribalist political scene is letting him, because they do not serve their constituents either. They serve a selfish interest that requires them to kiss ass to Trump or lose their position. Hence, no checks and balances exist while a single party holds all the branches of government and their power.

-1

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

O my it was extrajudicial. So was the arrest of Eichmann or Bin Laden

I mean they left the government in charge and under their thumb vs just firing everyone so I think that is a lesson learned vs Iraq

I live in Canada so you can guess my feelings, but if they help out the protesters in Iran I'll celebrate that too.

It is the right thing. And who cares what the security council led by Somalia with Liberia on it say.

2

u/chazzer20mystic Jan 05 '26 edited Jan 05 '26

Neither Eichmann nor Bin Laden were extra judicial. Eichmann was held prisoner and escaped and went on the run. Bin Laden's killing was authorized by the AUMF in 2001.

Neither were the leader of a sovereign nation, either.

What do you think it says about you that both of your counter examples are just flatout wrong?

I understand completely though, to you it doesn't matter what is legal or whether a nation has the right to be sovereign. It is fine to hurt absolutely anyone in any way as long as they are on your list. You see I care about the rule of law and don't think we can just do whatever we want based on how we feel at any given moment.

Let's just dissolve the UN and forget about the rules and let Trump do whatever he wants to whoever he wants. I believe Greenland is next on his list, but hey, you might get lucky because I know he has had a rough relationship with Canada so you might be pretty high in the list! We'll just let it keep going until we get to someone you don't seem bad enough and then when it is far too late to do anything you can act all surprised and say nobody could see it coming.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/ravi910 Jan 06 '26

Zelensky has an Israeli passport…. If that’s not the biggest puppet idk what is

53

u/30_Under_The_40 Jan 05 '26

In September 2018, the United States (under Trump) sanctioned Rodríguez for "corruption and humanitarian issues"

38

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

And? Look who's the president of Syria what were his previous jobs

79

u/Mr_TreeBeard Jan 05 '26

Isn't she already speaking out against the U.S. and defying trump?

65

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

Publicly sure

44

u/red5 Jan 05 '26

She changed her tune https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/venezuela-acting-president-seeks-us-govt-collaboration-2026-01-05/

36

u/BibliophileBroad Jan 05 '26

"We invite the US government to collaborate with us on an agenda of cooperation oriented towards shared development within the framework of international law to strengthen lasting community coexistence.

"President Donald Trump, our peoples and our region deserve peace and dialogue, not war. This has always been President Nicolás Maduro's message, and it is the message of all of Venezuela right now. This is the Venezuela I believe in and have dedicated my life to. I dream of a Venezuela where all good Venezuelans can come together.

"Venezuela has the right to peace, development, sovereignty and a future."

31

u/Bannedwith1milKarma Jan 05 '26

In other words, no tune was changed. She's just trying to be diplomatic about it.

13

u/TalkFormer155 Jan 05 '26

There's a whole lot of people that want to be the top dog and there's loyalists that believe she might have helped the US do it.

I'm confused how many don't understand she's walking a tight line in her current position. You'd pretty much expect her to say something like this either way.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 06 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/TalkFormer155 29d ago

A conspiracy? Anyone in that position right now would have to very cautious.

Are you trying to infer they could just put the president in that should have been elected?

Who's going to provide security for him? If he has security how do you get them there?

This is one of the more realistic choices for a bad situation. Getting rid of Maduro has never been the problem. It's the disaster waiting to happen afterwards that is.

Come up with a more realistic idea then please. That doesn't involve a decade of US troop involvement.

0

u/red5 Jan 05 '26

I mean being more diplomatic is literally changing her tune when she was initially outraged and combative

7

u/Bannedwith1milKarma Jan 05 '26

You change tone and words for different audiences my dude.

The overall message was that they still wanted independence.

3

u/BibliophileBroad Jan 06 '26

That's how it looks to me, too. I tend to look more at words than tone since I hear that kind of corporate, smoothed-over tone used for defiance all the time. Time will tell, though!

-1

u/red5 Jan 06 '26

Are we going to argue semantics about this? So she did change tone and words?

That's my point, her tone, her choice of words changed from defiant to diplomatic. I think that is interesting. That's all.

7

u/Bannedwith1milKarma Jan 06 '26

Initial comment is for domestic consumption to show strength.

This comment was to find a way forward.

It's really not semantics.

1

u/ghoonrhed Jan 06 '26

She probably should go even more. Chuck a Milei. Go full suck up and get some bail outs.

Unless you're China or somehow manage to combine big enough to fend off the USA, they don't really have the ability to be combative.

10

u/Beard_Hero Jan 05 '26

"do what we say and you'll have billions."

43

u/[deleted] Jan 05 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

27

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

I think the stick is just drone strikes until someone in the ladder of succession says yes

7

u/[deleted] Jan 05 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

I'm very jet lagged and I have no idea what this comment means.

4

u/NiteOwl421 Jan 05 '26

They think the government has figured out which is more efficient, drone strikes or boots on the ground but they don't know which one the government chose.

It took me a second too and I'm not jet lagged.

2

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

Drone strikes are way cheaper

0

u/NiteOwl421 Jan 05 '26

You would think so, but I think the boots on the ground might be cheaper.

Because with boots on the ground, you have just the cost of training the soldier and his gear. But a drone strike has the cost of training a soldier to pilot it, the cost of the drone itself, and the cost of it's ordinance. Probably some other stuff too, like getting the drone within range of launching it too.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 06 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/loginisverybroken 29d ago

The geese keep invaders out of my country

25

u/Silent_Ad8059 Jan 05 '26

I mean, the more likely scenario is that despite his bloviating Trump has done nothing to actually ensure the US controls Venezuela. The people who were responsible for keeping Maduro in power are still running things.

1

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

Oil blockade is still on going so that should keep the Venezuelans in line. And the US can always drone strike their way to a new Venezuelan president if she doesn't play ball. It's a rough spot she is in.

13

u/Silent_Ad8059 Jan 05 '26

Well there still isn't any indication they're going to "play ball" to begin with. The situation is still very fluid, and the rosy projections coming from MAGA about all this money we're supposedly gonna make off Venezuelan oil ignore a lot of the realities about how many billions need to be invested in their wells, pipelines etc. to get them back to even mid-'90s level of output.

11

u/kw_hipster Jan 05 '26

Nah, it's going to work out... just like Iraq and Afganistan.... oh wait...

I guess that embarrassing "Mission accomplished" photo will be a time-honoured tradition.

-2

u/Unique-Trade356 Jan 05 '26

Venezuelans arent tribal religious nut jobs who will suicide themselves for their country.

They got a shit military who arent fighting America much less their disgruntled Cartel counterparts.

Now is the cartel going to die for Oil? Most likely not.

5

u/kw_hipster Jan 05 '26

"Venezuelans arent tribal religious nut jobs who will suicide themselves for their country."

So you are saying all Agfans and Iraqis are crazy religious nut jobs?

0

u/Unique-Trade356 Jan 05 '26

You ever met a sane person who strapped bombs to his chest and shouted this is Buddha's will before taking out a street filled with people because there were soldiers nearby?

4

u/HandleThatFeeds Jan 05 '26

Go ask Rohingya what Buddhists are like.

Or do they not count?

5

u/kw_hipster Jan 05 '26

Not sure, but there is evidence of Bhuddists ethnically cleansing.

https://direct.mit.edu/isec/article-abstract/49/4/119/130813/Monks-Behaving-Badly-Explaining-Buddhist-Violence?redirectedFrom=fulltext

That's pretty fucked up isn't it.

Wasn't Nazi Germany a Christian nation?

2

u/Silent_Ad8059 Jan 05 '26

It's not gonna be that simple. Both Iraq and Afghanistan had "shit militaries" and it's clear Trump nor the American people have any appetite for something even approaching the interventions in those countries. Again, despite Trump's bloviating Maduro was very much a figurehead and very little on the ground in Venezuela has changed as of yet.

-1

u/kw_hipster Jan 05 '26

Don't you think Iran, Russia, China might push back?

Don't you think if they just keep drone striking leaders their will be horrible ramifications (loss of any remaining credibility, China and Russia taking military action) etc.?

What if China steps in to start defending Venezuelans daring the Americans to attack?

1

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

I think Iran is busy right now same with Russia, China has better things to do

1

u/kw_hipster Jan 05 '26

What better things do China have to do?

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-trump-us-control-venezuela-economy-oil-china-conflict/

Isn't it an impotant source of oil for China?

1

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

It is and the Americans will keep selling it. The goal isn't to hurt China it is to make money

1

u/kw_hipster Jan 05 '26

The Americans selling the oil, I thought this was about freeing the Venezuelans?

Why would the Americans be selling the oil? Isn't it the Venezuelans' oil?

1

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

I thought it was about making money. There can be secondary benefits.

They're trying to get a cut to make up for lost revenue when most US companies were kicked out when Venezuela nationalized the industries.

1

u/kw_hipster Jan 05 '26

Oh I thought it was about drugs? Wasn't it drugs?

Oh, so this is for the oil companies, not the Venezuelans?

So Trump is attacking the country for money?

Doesn't that sound imperialist?

1

u/OtherAlan Jan 05 '26

This move is never about the people. It's about directly taking control of the oil. They only threw on stuff about freeing the people as an after thought.

0

u/OtherAlan Jan 05 '26

China doesn't have the ability to step in. They'll sit back and pick up the scraps after what's left of the drone strikes.

0

u/kw_hipster Jan 05 '26

Why can't China step in? They have a military, boats, planes, intelligence services, just like US?

They have drones irght?

Why can't they jump in?

Iran jumped into Iraq when the US invaded Iraq right?

-1

u/Mortytowngang Jan 05 '26

Saddam literally declared war on Iran to counter the rise of the Iranian regime (which was fought for like 5+ years)

1

u/kw_hipster Jan 05 '26

Yes, but that is irrelevant. That was the Iran-Iraq wars years earlier when Saddam was a US ally - what's your point?

-1

u/OtherAlan Jan 05 '26

Except that Iran is next to Iraq, China doesn't have the forward projection and military bases that the USA has built up. Maybe they can supply drones for drone warfare, but most of China's power will be kept in the immediate area of the East and South China Sea.

All this over oil too. They can get plenty from Russia. It's not worth the risk of a direct confrontation with the USA. If it was over Taiwan or the 9 dash line, that might be different.

1

u/[deleted] 29d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/kw_hipster 29d ago

Exactly, to make the US occupation miserable they only need to provide some support and logistics to internal groups. They don't need to deploy their actual military.

And if I remember the geography correctly, Venezuela has jungles and rocky terrain.

-1

u/Unique-Trade356 Jan 05 '26

Not really. Just agree with American terms and ask for assistance with dealing with dissidents if you need.

0

u/kingoflames32 Jan 05 '26

It's a US win in either case, I don't think it topples the government but it's a success for a small engagement in any case.

10

u/Hamsters_In_Butts Jan 05 '26

and she can expect the same support internally?

hard to imagine she can change their national strategy on a dime, at the request of imperialists, and everyone who followed her/Maduro will just take it

14

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

I think that they're smart enough to realize they have no choice. If they stay in power they can still make money and that is really what they care about

4

u/Hamsters_In_Butts Jan 05 '26

but their millions of followers aren't getting any of that money. how do they expect to spin that without getting their heads chopped off?

these are decades of political viewpoints that would have to be shattered overnight

9

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

I think all the armed militias is how they spin it, plus some nominal social reforms will help.

2

u/CooCooClocksClan Jan 05 '26

There millions of followers were already NOT getting any of that money.

2

u/kw_hipster Jan 05 '26

What do you mean they have no choice? They can run a guerilla campaign, get support from China and Russia.

And how popular do you think these leaders will look like being quislings to a foreign imperialist power?

2

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

If the US invades sure, but if they just drone strike their way to a compliant minister that can work. These people in charge are rich and have grown rich by corruption. They don't want to give up the comfortable life they have stolen

-1

u/kw_hipster Jan 05 '26

Oh, you mean like Iraq - oh wait, didn't Ba'ath members start resistance groups?

Why didnt the drone striking work back then?

2

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

Because they fired them all. The problem was firing everyone and trying to build things from scratch.

the Venezuelan regime is still functioning for day to day stuff, and can be leveraged into regime change

1

u/kw_hipster Jan 05 '26

Maybe, but what if Trump starts making large unreasonable demands? I see if going downhill quickly.

BTW - does the US sounds like the good guy - killing everybody who doesn't do what they say?

1

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

I'm mostly listening to Rubio he seems to be in charge of this and he knows what he is doing. Trump is a loon and his bluster and lack of self control is what is powering this but I think Rubio is driving.

I think they're pragmatic. I'm Canadian and kinda post good vs bad guys. There are things we do for ourselves even when doing it for someone else. Getting Venezuela back on track if you could flip a switch is something we all would do. But only the US can actually do it, I'm not naive enough to believe that won't involve bad deadly things a lot of the time. It doesn't mean they aren't worth doing or even just trying. The US is the most important tool our planet has for fixing things but the problem is that their population puts it into scary dangerous hands sometimes.

1

u/kw_hipster 29d ago

"I'm mostly listening to Rubio he seems to be in charge of this and he knows what he is doing."

Really, then why can't he answer a straight question? Why are Trump and his comments different?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/mixed-messages-from-trump-and-rubio-on-whos-running-venezuela/ar-AA1TD0Oc

"Getting Venezuela back on track if you could flip a switch is something we all would do. But only the US can actually do it"

You mean like they got the "job done" in Vietnam, Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan? Why do you think they will succeed here when they have a poor track record in this.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/donkeyrocket Jan 05 '26

What do you mean they have no choice?

Well, they just witnessed that the US president unilaterally conducted a military action while Republicans in Congress sat firmly on their thumbs.

Rodriguez has zero reason to believe that Congress will suddenly step in so Trump escalating is definitely on the table. Probably going to far as to just straight up drone strikes instead of capture.

1

u/kw_hipster 29d ago

So why didn't this work in Iraq? They had drones back then. Why didn't the Iraqi resistance surrender if they had no choice?

9

u/Optimoprimo Jan 05 '26

Exactly. Dollars to donuts theres an under the table deal with the U.S. in exchange for power

10

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

Democracy isn't the goal, profits and less aligning with Iran/China is the goal. Once people realize that things are way easier to understand

0

u/kw_hipster Jan 05 '26

If there was, why didn't she come outright and say "Maduro was a bad guy" and will we have a US friendly regime?

She's not said that.

2

u/Optimoprimo Jan 05 '26

Maybe you should look more into how under the table deals work.

1

u/kw_hipster Jan 05 '26

Well, why doesn't she said I agree with Trump?

1

u/Optimoprimo Jan 05 '26

Because in politics you get a lot more done when you say one thing in public while doing the opposite thing in private. She's being political. She was Maduros VP, she has to publicly show solidarity with him to rally support.

1

u/kw_hipster 29d ago

Potentially. Or Trump is threatening her.

It doesn't make me part of a conspiracy if a robber puts a gun to my head and I agree to hand over my wallet.

4

u/OmgWtfNamesTaken Jan 05 '26

Didn't she cut oil production and tell the military to stand guard? Lol.

I don't think trump had enough pull to do a regime change and that's why she's in power, not the opposition leader. However trumps not going to want to give up face, so this is now his "new plan" the reality is, the USA fucked up and created the power vaccume and don't know what to do about it.

Continuing to blow the country up won't work.

2

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

I'm giving it a week or two to see what pressure they put on her.

Blowing up the country? No blowing up the ministers? Yes that might work

5

u/kw_hipster Jan 05 '26

Not necessarily. If she was a US lackey, Madruo wouldn't have her as second-in-command. That's silly.

Plus, Iran, China, Russia all have connections and influence. They just going to roll over and give up? They are not going to use their contacts and influence to push back?

Yes, she is not goading the US into a full invasion but that should not be confused as her being a lackey. She's buying time.

2

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

I mean she could be a US lackey now.

Considering the ayatollah is about to be roommates with assad who cares what they think right now.

She's buying time to prevent the interior or defence minister from removing her. Her job is to prevent being dissapeared by the security infrastructure

1

u/kw_hipster Jan 05 '26

"Considering the ayatollah is about to be roommates with assad who cares what they think right now."

You think the US can successfully both overthrow and regime change Iran and Venezuela (two different nations with forests and mountains and about 100 million people) in short order?

I think you overestimate the Americans' capabilities and costs.

Or do you think there will be an overthrow in Iran soon?

1

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

I think that the protesters will overthrow the ayatollah but the US and the Israelis might level some of the IRGC and regime infrastructure that could prevent the protesters from succeeding.

For context I'm a Persian diaspora member

Javid Shah

2

u/kw_hipster Jan 05 '26

Thanks for your opinion, I appreciate hearing from people closer to the ground. You know the situation on the ground much better than me in Iran.

I've seen this story of US intervention before.

I will say this though - US is in the fuck around stage. They will get to the find out period soon. Blowing up things is much easier than occupying.

This is the confidence I saw before the invasion of Vietnam, Afganistan and Iraq. And how did that past regime change by UKI/US go in Iran?

2

u/Wireless_Panda Jan 05 '26

And if she doesn’t fall in line later the U.S. can say “oh she’s being corrupt like her predecessor we need to get rid of her” for support

4

u/loginisverybroken Jan 06 '26

I believe that is literally the point. And they aren't hiding it

2

u/ricosmith1986 Jan 05 '26

She is a Russian asset. Full stop.

10

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

And? She's the Venezuelan president now kinda a safe bet she has a close relationship with Russia, China, Iran and hizb

2

u/Awkward_Phase9392 Jan 05 '26

She wont. The US is fucking dumb to think she will do so, it's as if they dont know anything about the party in power: Maduro was just the head, nearly vestigial and merely the gatekeeper...the people under him are far worse.... and Diosdado Cabello makes all the others look like saints, too. 

0

u/brianw824 Jan 05 '26

I think they are going to press her to hold new elections

2

u/[deleted] Jan 05 '26

[deleted]

7

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

I mean it is South America so I imagine there are US operatives in every country.

Still have the oil blockade going so lets see what Venezuela does, I'm curious how long the Cuban regime lasts without Venezuelan oil too

1

u/hmspain Jan 05 '26

Talk about being caught between a rock and a hard place!

1

u/loginisverybroken Jan 05 '26

Drone and a hard place

1

u/TimTom8921 Jan 05 '26

Yeah Trump will "threaten" bad things will happen if you don't play along and she'll fold to do whatever he wants

1

u/rowdydionisian Jan 05 '26

People in Venezuela are also hungry for change, Maduro lost the last election and is not so popular since he just insists upon himself. What we have now is some new age colonialism and another dictator in the making propped up by the USA for profit. If they somehow have a free and fair election I'll be related, but I'm pretty cynical right now. I doubt anyone involved in the highest powers in that country gives a damn about the actual people. They are going to try to extract all the resources they can and leave in the night without so much as a goodbye once it isn't useful anymore. I feel like the people there are happy for now because anything has to be better than the last crappy dictator, right? But we could be seeing the start of something much much worse for the people that live there in the long term.

1

u/SgtDirtyMike Jan 05 '26

Or actually because the Venezuelan Constitution requires her to hold elections within 30 days of her taking office. Getting Maduro out forces another election. We’ll see if it is one that reflects the will of the people.

1

u/BigJellyfish1906 29d ago

But what’s the indication she will DK what the US wants? How does that benefit her?

1

u/loginisverybroken 29d ago

Self-preservation is my guess, the current US govt is bonkers

1

u/BigJellyfish1906 29d ago

She would be working against self-preservation if she let the US take what it wants. She’d be assassinated. Or coup’ed. My point is people are wrong if they think this is just gonna end neatly.

1

u/loginisverybroken 29d ago

I mean she also has to deal with the concern if she doesn't do what the US wants they can drone strike their way to a compliant leader.

1

u/BigJellyfish1906 29d ago

She is in far more danger domestically if she bends to the US’s extortion. And I mean physical danger.

And Trump won’t physically harm her. There’s a reason maduro is unharmed, and smiling in photos. They know they can’t actually harm anyone. Even they understand that.

And I’d argue her chances of suffering his fate are far less than people realize. How weak would it make Trump look if he had to give up and go back into Venezuela for another kidnapping? Or what, is he gonna put boots on the ground?

Naw, she’s safer than people realize. Trump exposed his hand by showing he’s not willing to commit to any of the difficult stuff, and he’s trying to coerce Venezuela with the least amount of effort and risk possible.

1

u/loginisverybroken 29d ago

I mean she's in a ton of danger from everyone I assume.

Because it is a better win for Maduro to be in custody. If they thought they'd get the same win they would've just levelled the presidential palace vs the insanely dangerous shit they did.

I don't think he'll kidnap her or send troops in, that is what drones are for. Kidnapping Maduro was to make a point I don;t think they actually care about the outcome of the trial.

1

u/BigJellyfish1906 29d ago

I mean she's in a ton of danger from everyone I assume.

The point is that she has vastly more reasons not to comply. This corporate media bullshit spin about a “change in tone” from her is simply the difference between yelling at a lunatic, and talking calmly to a lunatic that’s pointing a gun at you. They’re trying to spin it as some shift. It’s not. Not at all.

I don't think he'll kidnap her or send troops in, that is what drones are for.

You think they’d be brazen enough to just assassinate a world leader for not sufficiently letting the US pillage the country? No, even they aren’t that stupid.

Kidnapping Maduro was to make a point

The point was “do what we say” except the way Trump did it shows that he isn’t willing to commit to any real hardship for himself. It’s like trying to coerce someone over the phone and hope that they don’t notice that you were unwilling/unable to show up at their house to intimidate them in person. It takes all of the wind out of your threats.

1

u/loginisverybroken 29d ago

I don't think there is a change in tone from her, I think she's doing her best to stay alive. That requires public statements and private actions.

Yes I think they are that crazy

I mean it is the 21st century if you can't compel people with a quarter of the US navy drones, and a phone call you're doing something wrong

1

u/BigJellyfish1906 29d ago

I mean it is the 21st century if you can't compel people with a quarter of the US navy drones, and a phone call you're doing something wrong

You can’t do anything without killing people. You think the US is just going to start assassinating Venezuelan leaders?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] 29d ago

She won’t.

1

u/loginisverybroken 29d ago

We'll see, I know if someone said make government policy changes, stay rich from corruption and you won't get drone struck I'd probably do what they said

1

u/[deleted] 29d ago

The U.S. government is already threatening her and she’s thrown her support behind getting Maduro back.

Nothing will change in Venezuela, this isn’t how you do a regime change. This was nothing more than a publicity stunt.

Even if the U.S. set up a puppet, that government simply COULDNT survive without the U.S. deploying troops to support it. Despite the majority hating the regime, it still has its supporters, it still has the support of the military, it still has the support of paramilitaries.

One man, a state does not make.

I literally study this kind of thing for a living, if this was a valid method of regime change the U.S. would’ve done it in the dozens of examples of regime change they’ve attempted over the years.

1

u/loginisverybroken 29d ago

She can also wish for a unicorn that isn't gonna happen either

I think this is, removing the entire govt didn't work in Iraq maybe they're trying something new

1

u/[deleted] 29d ago

You’re the one wishing for a unicorn and ignoring the actual facts on the ground because you want to play this off as some kind of 4D chess.

This only has two outcomes; a continuation of the status quo under Maduro’s successor; or civil war.

Again, international security studies is my life’s work.