Fair odds Trump is wary the swamp is trying to drag him into a fuckfest they'll use to bury him.

Seems like he's told them "I authorize nothing, but I'm just going to turn around now and if shit happens while I'm not looking then it's not my fault".

This coup attempt seems a bit clumsy, it's too soon, like trying to ripen a green banana by microwaving it. The idea was to starve out their economy for a few more years, then capitalize on pent up misery, while key players at the top get secured and are ready to flip at the opportune moment. This will work, as would just waiting for the next elections.

You have top donors like the Koch bothers and Paul Singer who are all in and want regime change NOW. Singer is little Marco's top financier, and the top Republican donor along with other Israel firsters like Sheldon Adelson and Bernard Marcus (Home Depot).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Singe...ilanthropy


If you really want to understand the Trump presidency, all you need to do is to look into these people's agendas: Israel firsters, open border Kalergists, RINOs who are just as rabidly pro-replacement as your average trotskist SPLC cog who keeps a stat sheet of US demography on his office wall. This is why Kushner is in charge of Immigration, he's their guy in the White House. And contrary to what guys like Anonymous Bosch believe, there is no real daylight between those right-wing aliens and their Reform leftie billionaires on the key issues of immigration and foreign policy.

Quote:Adelson, who dumped more than $75 million into trying to defeat Barack Obama, is pro–immigration reform. In a December 2012 interview with The Wall Street Journal, the casino mogul said: “I’m pro–DREAM Act ... It would be inhumane to send those people back, to send 12 million people out of this country to disrupt a whole potpourri of family issues over what happens to the children. I mean, it’s all ridiculous. So we’ve got to find a way, find a route for those people to get legal citizenship.”

https://www.thedailybeast.com/gop-donors...r-and-more

Adelson really cares about those millions of poor Mexican kids in CA or TX, but seems to care a lot less about the brown kids being mowed down by his chosen brethren back in his other country.

(04-30-2019 11:29 AM)Luvianka Wrote:  It seems that the US cannot organize a sucessful coup anymore.

The Brazilians and Colombians got cold feet and will never invade without US forces by their side (in front of theirs).

US also has most recent experience with the people in Africa and the ME when it comes to coups and South America is a different beast. I guess they need to call up the old school coup makers from the 20th Century when it comes to these countries.

If any US force sets foot there its not going to go the way they hope.

(04-11-2019 04:48 PM)TutorGuina Wrote:  Reality is: We just don't like war, never had a real one in a long time; and most importantly, there is little to gain from so much money burnt, our crooked media is trying to destabilize Bolsonaro's government and our economy is not that good yet

The upside would be some oil and a controversial political victory? Yeah, fuck that shit, I agree
But Venezuela only tends to get worse, we and Colombia already had skirmishes involving refugee protesters and Chavista soldiers at our borders, more events like this and Maduro bullshitery could force our hand

Spot on dude. You are describing what it is really like. I'm ok with leaving venezuela alone because it doesn't affect me to be honest. Besides dealing with venezuelan immigrants and beggars from that shithole everyday, they can't really take my job and some of their hoes are fucking good. If It was for me, just leave those commie fuckers alone to mind their bussiness. The real problem in Colombia is How can we deport 1000.000 illegal venezuelans who are currently flooding into my country? I wish we did something about that. If maybe they could go back to their shithole and leave my shithole alone that'd be fine but that might need someone to step in and we already have many problems. Tough situation. Fuck maduro.

Seeing President Trump's twitter feed, I feel like re-posting below a previous post of mine:

(04-08-2019 07:04 PM)Going strong Wrote:  The USA have slapped heavy sanctions on the boats and companies that carry Venezuela's oil to Cuba. (...)

The US had been reluctant to move in this direction for reasons that I have discussed earlier on this thread (mainly, fear of Cuban "refugees"), but now it is apparently a done deal: the petrol will stop flowing towards Cuba.
(...) Now, Cuba is stuck with radioactive-asset Maduro and the oil will stop flowing.

So, well, what it means is: first, the US are using the death-by-multiple-cuts against Maduro. Secondly, Cuba will have to drop Maduro and strike a discreet deal with J. Guaido and the US. A deal that would maintain some, enough, oil shipments to Cuba, with Guaido accepting to honor some of the current contracts.

In exchange, Cuba will quite possibly have to recall or rein-in their (allegedly) 22.000 soldiers or intel officers currently propping up Maduro. (...)

Meanwhile, and unfortunately, it seems that shrewd Maduro will not crumble today . Leopoldo "White-Latino Mandela" Lopez has been forced to take refuge at the Chilean embassy. And Maduro's generals are still protecting him - and themselves, they have no other option left by now, it's Maduro or The Hague.

So at some point the US administration will realize that there is only one option that would work; I have described it several times on this thread, and it involves a modern, ecological, so quick it's almost painless, weapon falling from the skies. Nothing else seems to work.

Too bad though, seeing an agonizing Maduro about to destroy pussy-paradise Cuba. So, before it's too late, the Cubans should (urgently) negotiate with the US, secure some oil from Guaido, and let Maduro die (or discreetly terminate him themselves, without even the Russians noticing, accidents happen).

(04-30-2019 04:39 PM)Going strong Wrote:  Seeing President Trump's twitter feed, I feel like re-posting below a previous post of mine:

(04-08-2019 07:04 PM)Going strong Wrote:  The USA have slapped heavy sanctions on the boats and companies that carry Venezuela's oil to Cuba. (...)

The US had been reluctant to move in this direction for reasons that I have discussed earlier on this thread (mainly, fear of Cuban "refugees"), but now it is apparently a done deal: the petrol will stop flowing towards Cuba.
(...) Now, Cuba is stuck with radioactive-asset Maduro and the oil will stop flowing.

So, well, what it means is: first, the US are using the death-by-multiple-cuts against Maduro. Secondly, Cuba will have to drop Maduro and strike a discreet deal with J. Guaido and the US. A deal that would maintain some, enough, oil shipments to Cuba, with Guaido accepting to honor some of the current contracts.

In exchange, Cuba will quite possibly have to recall or rein-in their (allegedly) 22.000 soldiers or intel officers currently propping up Maduro. (...)

Meanwhile, and unfortunately, it seems that shrewd Maduro will not crumble today . Leopoldo "White-Latino Mandela" Lopez has been forced to take refuge at the Chilean embassy. And Maduro's generals are still protecting him - and themselves, they have no other option left by now, it's Maduro or The Hague.

So at some point the US administration will realize that there is only one option that would work; I have described it several times on this thread, and it involves a modern, ecological, so quick it's almost painless, weapon falling from the skies. Nothing else seems to work.

Too bad though, seeing an agonizing Maduro about to destroy pussy-paradise Cuba. So, before it's too late, the Cubans should (urgently) negotiate with the US, secure some oil from Guaido, and let Maduro die (or discreetly terminate him themselves, without even the Russians noticing, accidents happen).

This would be a great time for Cuba to shift alliances and start trade dialogue (including oil imports) with the US in exchange for broad political reform. I know its not going to happen as the legacy commies would have loosen their grip...but the writing is on the wall anyway

Mr MAGA just went total and completely nuts, he is desperate to grab Venezuelan oil.

WB

I'm starting to read all of Trump's tweets with the preface "If my masters wish it,".

It seems to lend a far more accurate understanding.

Hoping for a massive influx of female refugees from Venezuela after this neo-con war gets going. Hopefully some of us get big tittied Venezuelan girlfriends before it's all said and done. I certainly want to take home treasure if I'm going to get drafted. ?

Sometimes I want socialism to come to the US just to hear the screams coming from people like this.
I hate Boomers so much.

The childish rah-rah muh military bravado, the infantile understanding of the outside world, the casual disregard for human life and the cost that a war would entail...

Yeah, I think I'd take a 20% increase in marginal tax rates just to see this guy howl as a wealth tax stripped away his savings. If nothing else I could cancel my cable, 'cause I'd never get tired of watching it.

(04-30-2019 07:47 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

Sometimes I want socialism to come to the US just to hear the screams coming from people like this.
I hate Boomers so much.

Me too. They always ask, "how are you going to pay for it?"

I'm going to start telling them, "we're going to take the money from the boomers and cut your social programs. That way we don't go into any more debt."

The oil comes to the US no matter who is in charge. Venezuela crude is heavy and sour. The majority of refineries that can crack it into oils and gasoline are in the US.

Before the US refiners retooled to refine heavy oil (1990s), their type of oil was mostly turned into asphalt, which had low margins.

(04-30-2019 07:47 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

Sometimes I want socialism to come to the US just to hear the screams coming from people like this.
I hate Boomers so much.

The childish rah-rah muh military bravado, the infantile understanding of the outside world, the casual disregard for human life and the cost that a war would entail...

Yeah, I think I'd take a 20% increase in marginal tax rates just to see this guy howl as a wealth tax stripped away his savings. If nothing else I could cancel my cable, 'cause I'd never get tired of watching it.

I'm starting to see the value in religion if for no other reason than to fill the void that becomes otherwise occupied by boomer style world views.

I have more respect for African Shamanism than Boomer globo-capitalism because at least the former has cultural ties and a track record of preserving heritage values no matter how gruesome they happen to be.

The Boomers and their ridiculous self centered church of capitalism are a single-generation death cult who by any measure have a legacy a hundred times more murderous than ISIS. These lunatics unironically tell you with a straight face that if bringing in another million Indians to the country raises GDP by ten dollars a head per week then it's a good thing and that anyone who questions that is a fucking commie.

They cannot die quickly enough.

Venezuela needs to collapse. The coup would happen even if there was no U.S. interaction. The people are starving. Hyperinflation. Massive corruption. It's just a bad situation.

(04-30-2019 08:51 PM)SW15 Wrote:  Venezuela needs to collapse. The coup would happen even if there was no U.S. interaction. The people are starving. Hyperinflation. Massive corruption. It's just a bad situation.

"But...but...Dugin told me that Maduro`s Venezuela was based and redpilled, and a bulkward against Americaninsky imperialism!!! Only shills would say that!!!"

(04-30-2019 08:51 PM)SW15 Wrote:  Venezuela needs to collapse. The coup would happen even if there was no U.S. interaction. The people are starving. Hyperinflation. Massive corruption. It's just a bad situation.

US 'interaction' is the problem.
This is about the petro-dollar.

(04-30-2019 07:24 PM)Heuristics Wrote:  Hoping for a massive influx of female refugees from Venezuela after this neo-con war gets going. Hopefully some of us get big tittied Venezuelan girlfriends before it's all said and done. I certainly want to take home treasure if I'm going to get drafted. ?

This would be outstanding. They are fun and have great attitudes.

(04-30-2019 08:44 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  The Boomers and their ridiculous self centered church of capitalism are a single-generation death cult who by any measure have a legacy a hundred times more murderous than ISIS. These lunatics unironically tell you with a straight face that if bringing in another million Indians to the country raises GDP by ten dollars a head per week then it's a good thing and that anyone who questions that is a fucking commie.

They cannot die quickly enough.

The boomers believe in capitalism. That is news to me.

{delete]

Edit: wrong thread.

(04-30-2019 11:44 PM)The Black Knight Wrote:  So are we going to war with Iran?

Given that Trump is clearly Isreal First now, we just might.

Quote:What if Iran Retaliates and Shuts Down the Strait of Hormuz?
By Scott Ritter • May 1, 2019


The effort on the part of the Trump administration to shut down Iran’s ability to export oil is predicated on the false notion that the rest of the world will fall in lockstep with U.S. policy. But has President Donald Trump really thought through what would happen to the economic health of the world if Iran retaliates, shutting the Strait of Hormuz, through which much of the world’s oil flows daily?

The Trump administration’s push to reduce Iran’s oil exports to zero has entered a new, critical phase, with the United States refusing to extend the waivers it granted six months ago to eight nations, including China, India, Turkey, Japan, and South Korea, to purchase Iranian oil. Moreover, the United States has refused to allow for a “wind-down” period where impacted nations would be able to gradually wean themselves away from Iranian sources of energy. This means that, effective May 1, any nation purchasing oil from Iran will be subjected to punitive U.S. sanctions.

Iran has responded to the American decision not to extend oil waivers in typical fashion, with Rear Admiral Alireza Tangsiri, the commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Command (IRGC) naval forces, warning on April 23 that “if Iran’s benefits in the Strait of Hormuz, which according to international rules is an international waterway, are denied, we will close it”.

This threat was clarified the next day, April 24, by Iran’s Foreign Minister, Javad Zarif, who declared “ships can go through the Strait of Hormuz,” noting that “if the U.S. wanted to continue to observe the rules of engagement, the rules of the game, the channels of communication, the prevailing protocols, then in spite of the fact that we consider U.S. presence in the Persian Gulf as inherently destabilizing, we’re not going to take any action.”


The Strait of Hormuz is one of the most critical sea lanes in the world today, transiting some 18.5 million barrels of crude and refined products per day, representing roughly 20 percent of all oil produced globally. There is universal consensus among energy analysts that any closure of the Strait of Hormuz would result in “catastrophic” consequences for the global economy.


Less certain is whether Iran is serious about carrying out its threats. In July 2018, following the Trump administration’s decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal (the Joint Comprehensive Program of Action, or JCPOA), Iranian President Hassan Rouhani threatened to close the Straits in retaliation for renewed U.S. economic sanctions. Calmer heads prevailed, and Iran ended up taking the diplomatic route, working with the other signatories of the JCPOA to find ways to bypass U.S. sanctions.

In the intervening time, Iran’s efforts at crafting a diplomatic solution have fizzled, with Europe unable (or unwilling) to implement a meaningful alternative to the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) system, a financial network based in Belgium that provides cross-border transfers for over 11,000 financial institutions in more than 200 countries and territories around the world. Because the SWIFT board includes executives from U.S. banks, federal law allows the U.S. government to sanction banks and regulators who operate in violation of U.S. law. As such, any financial transaction involving Iran or any other entity under U.S. sanction would provide a trigger for secondary sanctions to be applied to facilitating institutions and/or persons.

Iran has a history of bypassing U.S. sanctions, and while the Trump administration’s targeting of Iran’s oil exports has caused significant economic harm to the Islamic Republic, Iran remains confident that it would be able to continue to sell oil in enough quantity to keep its economy afloat. In a recent appearance, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, declared that the American effort to block Iran’s oil sales will fail. “The Islamic Republic of Iran will be exporting any amount of oil it would require, at will,” Khamenei said.

There is a major difference between 2018 and today, however. The recent decision by the Trump administration to declare the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Command (IRGC) a terrorist organization has complicated the issue of Iran’s oil sales, and America’s reaction in response.

The IRGC has long been subject to U.S. sanctions. In 2012, the U.S. Department of Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), determined that National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) was an “agent or affiliate” of the IRGC and therefore is subject to sanctions under the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012 (ITRSHRA). Other Iranian oil companies have likewise been linked to the IRGC, including Kermanshah Petrochemical Industries Co., Pardis Petrochemical Co., Parsian Oil & Gas Development Co., and Shiraz Petrochemical Co.

While in 2012 the United States determined that there was insufficient information to link the National Iranian Tanker Company (NITC) as an affiliate of the IRGC, under the current sanctions regime imposed in 2018 the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL) and the NITC have been blacklisted in their entirety.

By linking the bulk of Iran’s oil exporting capacity to the IRGC, the United States has opened the door to means other than economic sanctions when it comes to enforcing its “zero” ban on Iranian oil sales. Any Iranian oil in transit would be classified as the property of a terrorist organization, as would any Iranian vessel carrying oil.

Likewise, any vessel from any nation that carried Iranian oil would be classified as providing material support to a terrorist organization, and thereby subject to interdiction, confiscation, and/or destruction. This is the distinction the world is missing when assessing Iran’s current threats to close the Strait of Hormuz. It’s one thing to sanction Iranian entities, including the IRGC—Iran has historically found enough work-arounds to defeat such efforts. It is an altogether different situation if the Unite States opts to physically impede Iran’s ability to ship oil. This would be a red line for Iran, and a trigger for it to shut down all shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

So far the United States has not shown any inclination to physically confront Iranian shipping. Indeed, as Iran’s top military commander Major General Mohammad Baqeri recently told reporters, U.S. naval and commercial vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz continue to respond to the queries transmitted by the IRGC naval forces responsible for securing Iran’s portion of the strategic waterway—an awkward reality given that the IRGC has been designated a terrorist organization, which means the U.S. Navy freely communicates and coordinates with terrorists.

“As oil and commodities of other countries are passing through the Strait of Hormuz, ours are also moving through it,” Bageri observed, declaring that “if our crude is not to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, others’ [crude] will not pass either.” Bageri went on to explain that “this does not mean [that we are going to] close the Strait of Hormuz. We do not intend to shut it unless the enemies’ hostile acts will leave us with no other option. We will be fully capable of closing it on that day.”

The challenge will come when the U.S. effort to bring Iran’s oil exports to zero fails—and most observers believe this will be the case. Iran’s Foreign Minister Javid Zarif has bragged that “Iran has a PhD in sanctions busting,” and historical precedence is on his side. If the Trump administration proves unable to shut down Iran’s ability to sell oil through sanctions, and therefore fails to blunt what it describes as Iran’s “malign activities” in the Middle East, there will be increased pressure to be seen as doing something—anything—to effectuate policy objectives, especially during the lead up to the 2020 presidential election, where the Trump administration would be loath to provide any fodder to its political opponents.

Because any effort to restrict or deny transit through the Strait of Hormuz would be rightfully seen as a provocative act worthy of military intervention, it is highly unlikely that Iran would take any precipitous action in that regard. Instead, Iran would most likely seek a gradual escalation of restrictions grounded in its legal interpretation of the 1982 United Nations’ Convention on the Law of the Sea, which grants Iran control over “territorial waters” extending to a maximum of 12 nautical miles beyond its coastline. Any ships using the northern and eastern routes through the Strait of Hormuz to gain access to the Persian Gulf would have to transit through Iranian waters.

Under the convention, Iran is permitted to deny free transit passage to nations, like the United States, which have not ratified the agreement. If the United States interdicts Iranian shipping involved in the transit of oil, then it is most likely Iran will close the Strait of Hormuz to U.S. shipping, citing the 1982 convention as its justification. The United States would either be compelled to back down (unlikely), or resort to military force, certifying it as the aggressor in the eyes of international law.

The military debate over Iran’s ability to close the Strait of Hormuz, and the U.S. ability to respond to such a threat, is moot—no insurance company will cover any oil tanker seeking to transit contested waters. The economic impact of any closure will be immediate, catastrophic and sustained. Even if the United States prevailed in a military conflict over the Strait of Hormuz (and it is not certain it would do so), any victory would be pyrrhic in nature, with the United States sacrificing its national economic health, and that of the rest of the world, on an alter of hubris that fails to advance the national interest in any meaningful fashion.

Source: https://www.theamericanconservative.com/...of-hormuz/

Answer = Yes!

(04-30-2019 10:54 PM)Mekorig Wrote:  

(04-30-2019 08:51 PM)SW15 Wrote:  Venezuela needs to collapse. The coup would happen even if there was no U.S. interaction. The people are starving. Hyperinflation. Massive corruption. It's just a bad situation.

"But...but...Dugin told me that Maduro`s Venezuela was based and redpilled, and a bulkward against Americaninsky imperialism!!! Only shills would say that!!!"

haha is this a caricature of some poster or dominant viewpoint on the forum? Putinbots?

I don't care about Maduro, I hope Trump fails, so he learns to not trust zionists.

If there is one thing that exceeds Trump's desire to cuck for zionists, it's his vanity. He does not like to look a fool.

One might start to wonder if the real target all along was never Venezuela, but Cuba.

I mean, things currently stand like this: Maduro has not received his (not costly, mind you, your taxes wouldn't be raised) Hellfire missile, and instead he rejoices, exercises (the dude has lost weight and looks rejuvenated, happy as fuck) and actually strengthens his grip on power - but meanwhile, Cuba is about to lose the whole imported oil from Venezuela, plus the Helms-Burton exemptions lifted (which could soon spark a vicious economic war with the EU that swore to retaliate), plus a possible, quote, "full blockade". Grim perspectives indeed for Cuba.

So at the end of the day, Maduro survives and laughs (and sends its oil and gold to Turkey, bye bye Havana), but Cuba meanwhile will suffer like never before. Was it the goal all along?

Mind you, I don't see how the US could accommodate millions and millions of (Cuban, if you know what it means: real tough, and street-sharp, people) refugees in Florida, if the Cuban government is ultimately strangled, but who knows, maybe there is a master-plan somewhere, for Cuba?

In any case, one also has to wonder what Cuba is gaining, today, by backing Maduro?, if Maduro for the foreseeable future can not export anything of value anymore to Cuba. Where is the net gain for Cuba, now that Maduro cannot export oil? Keeping face, sure, but what else?

So if I were the (well-educated) Cuban president, I would urgently negotiate with Guaido and/or Leopoldo Lopez (or who knows, with President Trump himself, a NK-like scenario), to find a new ally, an ally that will be able to export oil soon. And I would do it fast, before the Russians hurriedly replace Cuban officers with their own, with Maduro's blessing.