CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) — At least seven explosions and low-flying aircraft were heard around 2 a.m. local time Saturday in Venezuela’s capital, Caracas. The government accused the United States of attacking civilian and military installations in multiple states.
[…]
Venezuela’s government, in the statement, called on its supporters to take to the streets.
“People to the streets!” the statement said. “The Bolivarian Government calls on all social and political forces in the country to activate mobilization plans and repudiate this imperialist attack.”
The statement added that President Nicolás Maduro had “ordered all national defense plans to be implemented” and declared “a state of external disturbance.” That state of emergency gives him the power to suspend people’s rights and expand the role of the armed forces.
I would like to start out by saying I would’ve preferred Harris over Trump, and that the two parties are NOT the same. For example, the FTC as it was during Biden would never have happened under a republican administration.
What makes you think that bombing Venezuela wouldn’t have happened under Harris? I can only think of three explanations: because she is a woman, because she is a democrat, or because Kamala Harris specifically is against foreign intervention.
I would like to take this moment to reiterate that I would’ve preferred Harris over Trump, and that the two parties are NOT the same.
The first explanation sounds weirdly sexist to me, so I won’t spend too much time on it. We don’t have a female US president to compare with, but look at the voting record in congress and the senate on the use of force in the invasion of Iraq back in 2002. When you control for party affiliation, women were actually more likely than men to vote in favor of the invasion.
I would like to take this moment to reiterate that I would’ve preferred Harris over Trump, and that the two parties are NOT the same.
Maybe because she’s a democrat then? Let’s look at some recent democratic presidents, and see how they fared on foreign interventions.
Obama: 40 billion in military aid to Israel, expanded drone campaigns in Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan. Surge of 30k troops to Afghanistan. Continued use of black sites and torture camps like Gitmo. Explicit legal protection for the torturers.
Biden: 18B in military aid to Israel as it was committing a genocide. Air strikes on Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan.
I would like to take this moment to reiterate that I would’ve preferred Harris over Trump, and that the two parties are NOT the same.
Maybe Harris is an especially anti foreign intervention person then. From her DNC speech I quote: “I will ensure America has the strongest, most lethal fighting force in the world.” What do you reckon she wanted that fighting force for? A tea party?
I would’ve preferred Harris over Trump. It would’ve mattered a great deal for women’s rights, lgbt rights, and to some small extent even a bit for worker’s rights. But to pretend the electorate has any meaningful choice when it comes to US imperialism, is, I think, not realistic.
Your reply is a colossal waste of time to cope and seeth.
You try so hard to cope and fail so miserably.
It doesn’t matter if you spam fuck you’d prefer Kamala over Trump. What your spreading is objectively, pro-Trump propaganda and outright lies.
This “both sides” bullshit doesn’t just only benefit the fascists, its also blatantly untrue for anyone who actually researches the topic.
Was Kamala an angel? FUCK NO!
Are the Dems virtuous and pro-proletariat? FUCK NO!
Are we and the rest of the world worse off under Trump than Kamala? OBJECTIVELY FUCK YES!
I don’t know man, I see a pattern of every single democratic president since Eisenhower, no exceptions, enthusiastically committing war crimes, and you’re trying to tell me “no, not this one, this one is different”. Sounds like one of us is maybe a little bit in denial.
Also, implying that it’s a waste of time to look at the past actions of democrats to try and get a feel for what they will do in the future is such a self report.
Idk man, I think you’re reading what you want to read and not what I said, and instead are coping hard to justify surrender to fascists in 2024.
There is zero evidence whatsoever that Venezuela, let alone the absolute rapid-fire destruction of the US constitution and rule of law to get us here would have happened under Kamala. Especially since it didn’t happen under Biden. Venezuela was only ever really discussed by the fascists and invading it and taking over was in Project 2025
I think you’re coping with an extreme reach in this situation. You’re pointing to the actions of past Dems to claim Kamala might have very specifically attacked Venezuela unprovoked.
Insane cope. Just accept the left foolishly surrendered to fascists because they became too blinded for their hate of neo-liberals to see they were cutting their own balls off.
So to convince me that candidate A would not do xyz, you keep harping on about candidate B and how they would do xyz. Do you understand why that’s not a very convincing argument? We all know about project 2025, we all know about republicans. We’re looking at it. That doesn’t make democrats any better (on imperial foreign interventionist policies).
You clearly don’t read.
You and your camp make the dumb ass claim that Kamala would have likely done the same thing with Venezuela, when I say this wouldn’t have happened under Kamala.
I’ve provided my reasoning for why. You lot absolutely refuse to provide any reasoning or evidence to your side that does t rely on circumstances that don’t directly relate to the situation.