Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

As was pointed out in January 2022 when Russia was building up to invade Ukraine: No one moves that much into place if they don't plan to use it.  Lots of innocent Venezuelans are about to die.  Some Americans will, too.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Posted
9 minutes ago, Scheiss Meister said:

As was pointed out in January 2022 when Russia was building up to invade Ukraine: No one moves that much into place if they don't plan to use it.  Lots of innocent Venezuelans are about to die.  Some Americans will, too.

He appears to have been talked out of invading Nigeria, so we’ve got that going for us. That would have been a far larger shitstorm and a lot more deaths on both sides.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

dance marathon kids GIF by Children's Miracle Network Hospitals

U.S. conducts 20th strike on alleged drug boat, killing 4 people in Caribbean Sea - CBS News

Quote

The U.S. military conducted another strike on an alleged drug-trafficking boat on Monday, a Pentagon official confirmed to CBS News. The attack targeted a vessel in the Caribbean Sea and killed four people on board. 

Since September, U.S. forces have destroyed at least 21 vessels in 20 strikes in international waters, killing at least 80 people. The Trump administration says the operations — the details of which remain sparse — are part of an anti-drug offensive. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has dubbed the wider anti-trafficking effort "Operation Southern Spear."

The Pentagon has not revealed more information about the most recent strike. Previously, Hegseth has said the attacks have targeted "narco-terrorists" on known drug trafficking routes, although U.S. officials have not provided specific evidence that the vessels were smuggling drugs or posed a threat to the United States.

Some experts say the strikes, which have taken place in both the Pacific and Caribbean, may violate international law even if they target known drug traffickers. U.N. human rights chief Volker Türk this week urged an investigation into the legality of the strikes, warning of "strong indications" of "extrajudicial killings."

The latest strike comes amid an increasing U.S. military buildup in the region. This week, the U.S. Department of Defense confirmed the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Gerald Ford and other warships had entered the Southern Command's area of responsibility, which includes the Caribbean. The USS Ford is the largest aircraft carrier in the world, and the U.S. Navy's most advanced.

 

We've done 20 of these things.  And killed 80 people.

And we're just getting started.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 4
Posted

Actually, really stupid on Russia's part, since it's going to piss off Trump and they have to know why he's going after Venezuela.

He's already getting pushback from Republicans in the Senate and House who don't want another war started.

 

Posted
He appears to have been talked out of invading Nigeria, so we’ve got that going for us. That would have been a far larger shitstorm and a lot more deaths on both sides.

Yea?
Posted

Venezuela appearance in the Epstein emails released yesterday.

 

Some argue it's not just about the oil but taking regional control. I'm not sure there's a practical difference.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, Chopper said:

Venezuela appearance in the Epstein emails released yesterday.

 

Some argue it's not just about the oil but taking regional control. I'm not sure there's a practical difference.

Also, the fucking casual racism that is now not just okay, but is our actual national policy, is fucking incredible.  Referring to anyone from South America: "Don't know why they are so dirty given the fact that there are so many maids."

It's just fucking casual and ingrained in these pieces of shit.

So, what's the big deal if we bomb a bunch of dirty beaners anyway?  That is absolutely 100% the ethos governing our nation right now. 

To say I hate these fuckers is a massive understatement.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 4
Posted

Speaking to reporters tonight aboard Air Force One, President Donald J. Trump was asked if he had made up his mind yet about possible military action in Venezuela, to which he responded, “I sort of have made up my mind yeah. I can’t tell you what it would be, but I sort of have made up my mind yeah.”

In case anybody missed it, this was yesterday

G5rpSfTW8AAVell?format=jpg&name=large

  • Haha 1
Posted
On 11/13/2025 at 6:02 PM, Scheiss Meister said:

As was pointed out in January 2022 when Russia was building up to invade Ukraine: No one moves that much into place if they don't plan to use it.

It sounds like you're assuming someone rational is in charge.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
15 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Also, the fucking casual racism that is now not just okay, but is our actual national policy, is fucking incredible.  Referring to anyone from South America: "Don't know why they are so dirty given the fact that there are so many maids."

It's just fucking casual and ingrained in these pieces of shit.

So, what's the big deal if we bomb a bunch of dirty beaners anyway?  That is absolutely 100% the ethos governing our nation right now. 

To say I hate these fuckers is a massive understatement.

The average Brazilian is wayyyyy cleaner than the average citizen of this shit hole. Tropical climates and bugs that can make your life miserable=2+ showers daily and keeping the home spotless

  • Like 3
Posted
The average Brazilian is wayyyyy cleaner than the average citizen of this shit hole. Tropical climates and bugs that can make your life miserable=2+ showers daily and keeping the home spotless

Yeah. But they’re not white. So, obviously you understand the distinction here.
Posted (edited)

Colombian President:

Issue the order to all levels of the public security forces' intelligence to suspend the sending of communications and other dealings with U.S. security agencies. Such a measure will be maintained as long as the missile attack on boats in the Caribbean persists. The fight against drugs must be subordinated to the human rights of the Caribbean people.

Edited by atomheartbevo
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

All these boats are full of drugs and this is unrelated to anything in the Epstein files long ago. 

This has been more or less spelled out in what strategy and policy documents there  are: a desire to firmly re-establish the Monroe Doctrine in a maximalist way and demonstrate to China (and Russia) the futility of playing at Western Hemisphere influencer.  There is more than a little Putin-brain in the logic. 

The reasons not to do it are legion: expensive; destabilizing; risks using costly assets we need in the Pacific; undermines our credibility as a stabilizing force; will provoke other countries to hedge and reach out to China. 

Important not to lose sight of the real reasons not to do this in favor of ones that seem more emotionally satisfying but are inaccurate. 
 

 

Edited by 956 Worldwide
  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
22 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

What about the Boys from Brazil?

God, the Brazilians hate that book, and for good reason - they fought with the Allies against the Germans in Italy and in the Atlantic. Their expeditionary forces even had a cool name: As Cobras Fumantes - the Smoking Cobras (or Snakes).

Argentina, on the other hand....

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
On 11/14/2025 at 11:13 PM, atomheartbevo said:

Speaking to reporters tonight aboard Air Force One, President Donald J. Trump was asked if he had made up his mind yet about possible military action in Venezuela, to which he responded, “I sort of have made up my mind yeah. I can’t tell you what it would be, but I sort of have made up my mind yeah.”

In case anybody missed it, this was yesterday

G5rpSfTW8AAVell?format=jpg&name=large

Operation HARD WHITE DICKS was already in use

  • Haha 3
Posted
1 hour ago, flatdawgs said:

God, the Brazilians hate that book, and for good reason - they fought with the Allies against the Germans in Italy and in the Atlantic. Their expeditionary forces even had a cool name: As Cobras Fumantes - the Smoking Cobras (or Snakes).

Argentina, on the other hand....

Or Uruguay, Paraguay, or Chile.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
12 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Or Uruguay, Paraguay, or Chile.

Quoted for emphasis.  Nearly 30 years ago, we were in the tres fronteras region, and spent a couple of nights in Paraguay.  We ended up stopping at the Hotel Tirol for lunch.  Beautiful place, jungle flowers coming down to the courtyard, hummingbirds all over.  But we all commented rather immediately "hmmm....kinda got a bit of a nazi vibe going on here.   Hotel....TIROL....in Paraguay.  Yeah, we probably shouldn't linger here."  Turns out....

Quote

Initially, Mengele stayed in the Hotel Tirol, a guesthouse set in woodland on the edge of the town, which until recently catered to the many tourists who came to Hohenau seeking its fresh air and hearty cuisine. When The Times attempted to visit, we were told it was closed for maintenance. Back in the 1950s, it was owned by a former SS officer, Armand Reynaers.

It was at this hotel, in 1964, that the Israeli foreign intelligence service Mossad came tantalisingly close to capturing Mengele. Agents had tracked him down to his room, No 26. But by the time they stormed the building, he had gone. Someone had tipped him off ten minutes beforehand. He apparently escaped in his pyjamas.

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Quoted for emphasis.  Nearly 30 years ago, we were in the tres fronteras region, and spent a couple of nights in Paraguay.  We ended up stopping at the Hotel Tirol for lunch.  Beautiful place, jungle flowers coming down to the courtyard, hummingbirds all over.  But we all commented rather immediately "hmmm....kinda got a bit of a nazi vibe going on here.   Hotel....TIROL....in Paraguay.  Yeah, we probably shouldn't linger here."  Turns out....

 

Yeah, Stroessner (Paraguayan dictator from the mid-50s until 1989) was a bit of a fan of the Nazis, quite a few of whom - like Mengele - figured this out. He was, of course, supported by the US during nearly the entirety of his regime, and although he had to self-exile in Brazil for the remaining 15 or so years of his life his party has ruled almost uninterruptedly since then. Unlike Uruguay or Chile, Paraguay is, to say the least, more than a bit ambivalent about that era.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Interesting take here. And yes, I have heard the same from a few channels. Take out both regimes? Interesting. 

Why the real target of Trump’s campaign in Venezuela is Cuba

The US president is amassing firepower in the Caribbean to force Maduro out, but the ultimate goal may be regime change in Havana

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/11/18/trump-regime-change-cuba-venezuela-marco-rubio/

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, InkaUtexas said:

Interesting take here. And yes, I have heard the same from a few channels. Take out both regimes? Interesting. 

Why the real target of Trump’s campaign in Venezuela is Cuba

The US president is amassing firepower in the Caribbean to force Maduro out, but the ultimate goal may be regime change in Havana

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/11/18/trump-regime-change-cuba-venezuela-marco-rubio/

hqdefault.jpg

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/warning-signs-mexico-beach-us-department-of-defense-property/
 

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum on Tuesday ruled out allowing U.S. strikes against cartels on Mexican soil, a day after President Trump said he was willing to do whatever it takes to stop drugs entering the U.S. Meanwhile, Mexican and American diplomats were trying to sort out what may have been an actual U.S. incursion.

On Monday, men arrived in a boat at a beach in northeast Mexico and installed some signs signaling land that the U.S. Department of Defense considered restricted.

Mexico's Foreign Affairs Ministry said late Monday that the country's navy had removed the signs, which appeared to be on Mexican territory. "The origin of the signs and their placement on national territory were unclear," the ministry said in a statement.

—/—/
The signs read in English and Spanish, "Warning: Restricted Area," and went on to explain that it was Department of Defense property and had been declared restricted by "the commander." It said there could be no unauthorized access, photography or drawings of the area.

CBS 4 News Rio Grande Valley posted an image of one of the signs on social media.

The U.S. Embassy in Mexico shared a comment from the Pentagon Tuesday about the incident, confirming that contractors putting up signs to mark the "National Defense Area III" had placed signs at the mouth of the Rio Grande.

"Changes in water depth and topography altered the perception of the international boundary's location," the statement said. "Government of Mexico personnel removed 6 signs based on their perception of the international boundary's location."

The Pentagon said the contractors would "coordinate with appropriate agencies to avoid confusion in the future."

Mexico had contacted its consulate in Brownsville, Texas, and then the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City. Eventually, it was determined that contractors working for some U.S. government entity had placed the signs, Sheinbaum said.

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
4 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/warning-signs-mexico-beach-us-department-of-defense-property/
 

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum on Tuesday ruled out allowing U.S. strikes against cartels on Mexican soil, a day after President Trump said he was willing to do whatever it takes to stop drugs entering the U.S. Meanwhile, Mexican and American diplomats were trying to sort out what may have been an actual U.S. incursion.

On Monday, men arrived in a boat at a beach in northeast Mexico and installed some signs signaling land that the U.S. Department of Defense considered restricted.

Mexico's Foreign Affairs Ministry said late Monday that the country's navy had removed the signs, which appeared to be on Mexican territory. "The origin of the signs and their placement on national territory were unclear," the ministry said in a statement.

 

—/—/
The signs read in English and Spanish, "Warning: Restricted Area," and went on to explain that it was Department of Defense property and had been declared restricted by "the commander." It said there could be no unauthorized access, photography or drawings of the area.

CBS 4 News Rio Grande Valley posted an image of one of the signs on social media.

The U.S. Embassy in Mexico shared a comment from the Pentagon Tuesday about the incident, confirming that contractors putting up signs to mark the "National Defense Area III" had placed signs at the mouth of the Rio Grande.

"Changes in water depth and topography altered the perception of the international boundary's location," the statement said. "Government of Mexico personnel removed 6 signs based on their perception of the international boundary's location."

The Pentagon said the contractors would "coordinate with appropriate agencies to avoid confusion in the future."

Mexico had contacted its consulate in Brownsville, Texas, and then the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City. Eventually, it was determined that contractors working for some U.S. government entity had placed the signs, Sheinbaum said.

There’s a reason Mexico does nothing to the cartels until it’s a situation where they have to..  Most of government is cashing them sweet sweet cartel checks.  Not saying we should but they run a lot of shit in Mexico.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
57 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

War on the Rocks summary of what it could be like to take on Venezuela. 50K troops to pacify. 

https://warontherocks.com/2025/11/the-day-after-what-successful-regime-change-in-venezuela-would-really-take/

50,000 is a very optimistic number, not to mention they would be based off of ships as the article mentions.  People don’t realize how tough that would be to do - we would need a lot more ships in that area.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

50,000 is a very optimistic number, not to mention they would be based off of ships as the article mentions.  People don’t realize how tough that would be to do - we would need a lot more ships in that area.

That is to pacify, not take it. So yeah. As for bases, air support out of Panama, Trinidad, Puerto Rico. Maybe cut a deal with Guyana. 

But agree, that shit would not be easy. Check this CNN article out. 

- The United States shared images on Wednesday of joint military exercises in Trinidad and Tobago, as its armed forces amass in the region, building pressure on Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

The deployment is receiving logistical and diplomatic support from multiple Latin American countries, ranging from limited assistance to open cooperation with to US forces.

Here’s more on who’s backing the US operation in the Caribbean, which Washington says is meant to combat drug trafficking in the region:

https://www.cnn.com/2025/11/19/americas/us-military-deployment-support-caribbean-latam-intl

 

Edited by InkaUtexas
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, atomheartbevo said:

We really are going to invade Venezuela.

leonardo dicaprio bravo GIF

I think air/navy strikes to destroy they air defense and air force, then we take Maracaibo. Not Caracas. Then try and cut an "oil" deal and part of it is Maduro leaves. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

The below "Guest Essay" is a short analysis of the situation from a senior analyst at the International Crisis Group, writing from Venezuela. It sure sounds like an echo of the debates we had this summer about invading Iran and potentially toppling its government.

  • Are those who advocated regime change in Iran on board with regime change in Venezuela?
  • Are supporters of the regime in DC cool with the "Donroe Doctrine" which appears no different than Russia bullying all the neighbors in its "sphere of influence." Since January, we've threatened the sovereignty of Canada, Mexico, Panama, Greenland, and now Venezuela. Y'all see this, right?

And, as always, regime change = "We break it; we buy it." In one way or another, we'll end up being responsible for the mess, eventually.

image.thumb.png.7afb0a43762eb3ef92667d5c3a085e98.png
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/21/opinion/venezuela-trump-maduro-machado-regime-change.html

Caracas, Venezuela’s neglected but beautiful capital, sits behind a forested, over 9,000-foot tall mountain that obscures the city’s proximity to the sea. From the summit, on a clear day, the Caribbean looks close enough to touch. Out there, over the horizon, like a scattering of toys in a bathtub, floats a good portion of the U.S. Fourth Fleet, packing enough lethal hardware in Tomahawk missiles alone to level large parts of the city. B-52H strategic bombers and supersonic F-35 stealth fighters have prowled the edge of the country’s territorial waters.

There are also signs of President Nicolás Maduro’s response to the American military buildup. Along the highway that winds up to the capital from the coast, the Venezuelan military has placed concrete tank traps beside the tarmac, presumably at the ready in case the amphibious assault group onboard the U.S.S. Iwo Jima should attempt a landing.

Perhaps it’s the mountain that stands in the way of the American military swarm, or maybe it’s their feeling that there’s so little to be done about it, but caraqueños are, for now, going about their normal business. If the traffic is less snarled than it once was, if the restaurants aren’t as full, it has less to do with the specter of war than with Venezuela’s hyperinflation and a repressive security apparatus. Even down at the coast, the American military menace is treated mostly with typical Venezuelan ribaldry, rather than dread. “Have you heard?” people ask each other, jokingly. “The Marines have arrived!”

For all the deadly weapons floating off the coast, it seems increasingly clear that all the Trump administration’s push for regime change in Venezuela has done so far is create a potentially disastrous political trap. If the administration fails to oust Mr. Maduro, as is its apparent goal, that will almost certainly grant the dictator a political victory and deal a lasting blow to the Venezuelan opposition. If it succeeds, and Mr. Maduro finally falls, it may plunge the nation, already in crisis, into a potentially violent breakdown. No matter what happens, everyone loses.

Over the past few weeks, the forward momentum of the U.S. aggression seemed — temporarily at least — to have stalled. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the driving force behind the thrust for regime change, has played down the possibility of a ground invasion. The recent arrival of the aircraft carrier U.S.S. Gerald R. Ford and its battle group in the Caribbean, and reports of a flurry of meetings in Washington, led to some frantic speculation that the long-awaited ground strikes were imminent. But President Trump’s subsequent statement that the administration “may be having some discussions with Maduro” let the air out of the balloon once again.

Mr. Rubio has a close, longstanding connection to the uncompromising faction of the Venezuelan opposition headed by the Nobel Peace Prize winner María Corina Machado, who is currently in hiding. He is also keen to rid the hemisphere of leftist dictators. If we are then to take Mr. Rubio’s recent comments and Mr. Trump’s stated aversion to foreign military entanglements at face value — not to mention that of the MAGA base — the administration appears to be engaged in a kind of phony war: one that doesn’t require American boots on Venezuelan soil, but that is convincing enough either to scare Mr. Maduro into fleeing or to persuade his own military to topple him.

Ms. Machado and her closest allies have for years tried to persuade outside powers — the United States in particular — to intervene militarily against the Maduro regime, with little success. Mr. Trump’s return to office offered a fresh opportunity. Ms. Machado and her allies sought to build a case that Mr. Maduro posed a clear and present danger to the United States, rooted in three issues that resonated with the Trump administration: drugs, migration and terrorism. There is no public evidence to support the claim that Mr. Maduro is the head of a military-run drug cartel, but it contains enough half-truths to make it politically useful.

The gunboat diplomacy the Trump administration may have hoped would be a shortcut to bloodless regime change does not appear to be working. Mr. Maduro could well be losing sleep over the possibility of a targeted strike, a Special Operations snatch squad or even a full-scale intervention; he claims to have mobilized millions of militia members. But the safest outcome for those in Mr. Maduro’s inner circle is to remain in power. Any officers who might be privately keen to overthrow him would be reluctant to install Ms. Machado, their sworn enemy, in the presidency, and know full well the fate that awaits them if they fall afoul of Mr. Maduro’s security services.

As the world awaits Mr. Trump’s next move, there are broadly speaking two main directions this could go. Either the U.S. fleet disperses, presumably after demonstrating its firepower on some terrestrial targets as a token show of force, and leaves Mr. Maduro in power, or the Trump administration succeeds in toppling the government, with or without landing U.S. troops on Venezuelan soil.

n the first scenario, Mr. Maduro would benefit from having faced down “the empire,” as he calls it, and walk away with even more internal authority than before. Ousting Mr. Maduro could prove even more costly. Unless Ms. Machado and her allies have an unlikely secret transition deal with key figures in the Venezuelan military, whose cohesion and loyalty would be critical to maintaining internal security if Mr. Maduro goes, a swift ouster could produce a power vacuum. That, in turn, could lead to an open-ended internal conflict waged by armed groups resistant to change. Without the commitment of a huge U.S. military force to guarantee internal security — and a sustained diplomatic effort by Washington to back a political transition — Mr. Maduro’s ouster could usher in protracted, bloody chaos that would likely spill over Venezuela’s porous borders.

Ms. Machado and the opposition leadership risk paying a heavy price in either scenario. Having placed all her chips on an external intervention, her domestic credibility will suffer if U.S. force fails. If that happens, the Venezuelan government might not wish to jail her, and thereby make a martyr of a Nobel Peace Prize winner. It might prefer to let her deflate on her own, ideally in exile, where she would be less of a political irritant. If Mr. Maduro falls, but is replaced by a crony, that successor might be less reluctant to have Ms. Machado arrested. Either way, the long, painful struggle to restore the rights of Venezuelans will have suffered a severe setback.

Having outsourced its strategy to a foreign power, the Venezuelan opposition can, for now, do little but brace for impact. When the American fleet sails away and the world’s attention turns elsewhere, they will be left — as the local saying goes — to pick up the broken plates.

  • Hook 'Em 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...