6 ms·

White House gives Maduro ultimatum as U.S. moves toward land operations

41 points by clanky 11mo ago

ncr100 11mo ago
Maybe Epstein files are hiding in Maduro-land? /s Unnecessary waste of life, attention, money coming soon.
more_corn 11mo ago
Gunna go get that Nobel peace prize no matter who he has to blow up to find it.
- jleyank 11mo ago
  Somebody should convince the guy that it doesn't count ending a war that you started a little while before... Also, there has to be a general trend of peacefulness in one's behaviour.
JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
The only advantages I can see to America pushing for Maduro’s removal are unlocking mismanaged oil supplies and removing a hive of Russian, Iranian and Chinese activity from the Western Hemisphere. Those are the upsides. The downsides are prompting anti-American balancing moves across South America, Bay of Pigsing and increasing Maduro’s legitimacy, giving Russian air defences a paintbrush to our kit and fucking it up completely and sparking a refugee crisis. In practice, I’m increasingly convinced we’re about to go to war because of what a dead pedophile knows about the President.
- cogman10 11mo ago
  Don't forget the death and pointless carnage as downsides. Bombing fishing boats, saying it's "drugs" and using that to justify a war in our back-porch is insanity. Who even supports this? It seems like the most unjustified war we've ever started.
  - amanaplanacanal 11mo ago
    This feels even more manufactured than the Iraq invasion. I don't understand why Trump would do something like this which is gonna peel off yet another group of his supporters. Maybe he just thinks he's invincible now? He must feel like this helps him politically somehow, but I can't figure out how.
    - deleted 11mo ago
      [deleted]
    - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
      > he must feel like this helps him politically somehow, but I can't figure out how Distracts from a tariff-ravaged economy and the Epstein files. Potentially lets him funnel defence spending to allies.
      - blibble 11mo ago
        > Potentially lets him funnel defence spending to allies. it won't have any even the UK has decided not to support the US regime on this one
        JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
        > it won't have any Political allies. David Sacks, et cetera.
      - derwiki 11mo ago
        Genuinely curious: what stats back up “tariff-ravaged economy”? S&P is essentially at an all-time high
        crote 11mo ago
        And how much of that is felt by real-world people? The insane stock price of Nvidia & friends due to them passing around billions between each other doesn't matter even the slightest bit when your family business is going bankrupt.
- tomatotomato37 11mo ago
  Those upsides could have also been accomplished by pointing the CIA at Venezuela to do the same thing they've been doing across South America for the past fifty years.
  - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
    > Those upsides could have also been accomplished by pointing the CIA at Venezuela to do the same thing they've been doing across South America for the past fifty years Has the CIA actually advanced American interests in South America? Legitimate question. My layman's understanding is they serially fucked the theatres they were assigned to alongside America's reputation in exchange for, at best, short-term U.S. wins.
    - clanky 11mo ago
      "Has the CIA advanced American interests" is the wrong question. The CIA does not work for "The United States" proper, it works for a tiny section of it that comprises the ruling elites. Those people certainly enjoyed significant material benefits from CIA actions in Guatemala, Panama, El Salvador, etc.
      - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
        > CIA does not work for "The United States" proper, it works for a tiny section of it that comprises the ruling elites The CIA is popular with voters [1]. Not superbly. But more than the IRS, DoJ or Department of Education. [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/08/12/americans-see-many-federal-agencies-favorably-but-republicans-grow-more-critical-of-justice-department/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/08/12/americans...
        clanky 11mo ago
        4 decades of James Bond, Tom Clancy, Homeland, Zero Dark Thirty ...
- mc32 11mo ago
  Does anyone down there even like Maduro? As far as I can tell even “sympathetic” regimes down there are not fond of how he’s running the place. Given that, any public sentiment supporting him would be counterfeit. Maduro has created an ongoing migrant crisis for a decade. Colombia, Chile, etc., are up to their gills in Venezuelan migrants already. Pretty sure lots of them would love to go back home if even a barely mediocre government replaced him. They said, it’s their mess. They should fix it by themselves —we don’t need to go in there. Let them figure it out.
coffinbirth 11mo ago
How is it possible that a president of a country can close the airspace of another country? How can the extrajudicial killings of (over 80 by now!) alleged drug traffickers without any charges or trials be justified or accepted? These are, in fact, crimes against humanity. I'm convinced at some point in the future U.S. citizens will have to learn what war means.
- JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
  > How is it possible that a president of a country can close the airspace of another country? To be fair, closing airspace before engaging in air operations is an international courtesy. It reduces the chances of downing civilian airliners. (In a similar vein, announcing closures and then not following through is incredibly damaging.) > alleged drug traffickers without any charges or trials be justified or accepted? These are, in fact, crimes against humanity They are war crimes. If you're concerned about it, call your representative and tell them you care about the American military committing war crimes. There is currently momentum on the issue [1]. [1] https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/30/war-crimes-hegseth-venezuela-strikes-00671160 https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/30/war-crimes-hegseth-...
  - coffinbirth 11mo ago
    It cannot be a war crime if there is no war. There is no declaration of war and no approval of Congress. The ICC classified these strikes as crimes against humanity.
    - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
      > It cannot be a war crime if there is no war Is this true? Legitimate question. (Under U.S. law, I do believe they are war crimes given they're an abuse of war powers, whether exercised legally or not.) > ICC classified these strikes as crimes against humanity No, it did not. A "former chief prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC)" told the BBC "US air strikes on alleged drug smuggling boats would be treated under international law as crimes against humanity" [1]. I haven't seen the ICC take an official position on any of this, which is expected, since it's a judicial body that grinds deliberately. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd9kgqwnk8wo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd9kgqwnk8wo
mrlonglong 11mo ago
Destabilising south America like this will only entrench the cartels and bring the war right into the United States.
- clanky 11mo ago
  That will be a problem for South Americans and to a lesser extent you and me, not the ones pulling Trump's strings.
  - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
    > to a lesser extent you and me If this regime were capable of seeing past its own shoelaces, one could imagine a conspiracy to prompt a migrant crisis so the GOP has an issue its trusted by voters on.
- tim333 11mo ago
  In theory they get Maduro to >leave Venezuela immediately to allow the restoration of democratic rule and then sunshine and unicorns ensue.
- matheusmoreira 11mo ago
  The cartels are already entrenched. Organized drug gangs already dominate over a quarter of the south american continent. People openly speculate about how they control judges and politicians, and I don't doubt it for a second. If the US manages to deal a crippling blow to these drug gangs, he will have done south america a huge favor and I will be forever indebted to him.
  - mrlonglong 11mo ago
    What do you make of Trump pardoning a convicted drug kingpin who was once a President then?
    - matheusmoreira 11mo ago
      I'm not even going to try to justify that. I understand that Trump's war on drugs is probably just a pretext to increase their dominion over south america. They probably want Venezuela's oil too. None of that matters as far as I'm concerned. Here in south america things are way too fucked up to care about that stuff. South america has plenty of violent narcostates headed by literal communist dictators. Venezuela is just one of them, and my own country is rapidly following in its footsteps. It's gotten to the point the USA nuking them all into submission would be a huge improvement to the status quo. Being a US vassal state is preferable to living under a barbarous narcostate shithole. The reasons they use to rationalize the attack are irrelevant to me. I'll be happy so long as they get rid of all these narcocommunists.
DustinEchoes 11mo ago
“No new wars”
- cosmicgadget 11mo ago
  "This war was started by the cartels and corrupt Maduro regime under Sleepy Joe Biden." Or something similar. His base will not give it a second thought.
bithavoc 11mo ago
The US has seen six governments since Woodstock ‘99, alternating the ruling party almost perfectly every four years: Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden and Trump again. Venezuela has seen only two presidents in 26 years, Chavez and Maduro, and both belong to the same ruling party.
- PieTime 11mo ago
  And some US allies have seen no change, I’m hoping that’s not a metric for which countries to invade.
- tastyface 11mo ago
  You have stated a fact but provided no conclusion. Please finish your thought.
  - bithavoc 11mo ago
    exactly, there’s no conclusion, it’s been almost three decades. It’s nice to have a different ruling party every few years and not just every three decades like in Venezuela(so far). Maybe Venezuelas want to give their oil to another 3rd-party that is not Iran, Cuba, Russia or China for a change.
    - tastyface 11mo ago
      So, in other words, you believe we should attack Venezuela because they need a regime change and we need their oil. I have some choice words for that, but the mods wouldn't like it.
      - bithavoc 11mo ago
        You’re not providing a conclusion. Please finish your thought…
- rchaud 11mo ago
  So have Russia, Israel, Egypt and several other nations. I don't see the US cutting military aid to the latter two because of a lack of diverse electoral outcomes.
general1465 11mo ago
So mad king will cause rally around the flag in Venezuela. And then what? Another Vietnam? China and Russia will be more than happy to supply drones and weapons to grind US military in an endless insurgency. Russia especially, to just give USA a taste of a shitsandwich they are forced to eat for 4 years straight.
- m0llusk 11mo ago
  Then he chickens out on Tuesday as usual, that's what.
- JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
  > Russia especially Russia is in no position to help Maduro, they're currently being bailed out by Tehran and Pyongyang. China could, and it's genuinely interesting to see them sitting it out so far [1]. [1] https://www.wsj.com/world/americas/why-russia-and-china-are-sitting-out-venezuelas-clash-with-trump-0fcc7710 https://www.wsj.com/world/americas/why-russia-and-china-are-...
- Balgair 11mo ago
  "Surely a quick, violent, successful war of aggression is just what the ruler needs to shore up his legitimacy," said just about every failed monarch in history shortly before invading Serbia. https://bsky.app/profile/bretdevereaux.bsky.social https://bsky.app/profile/bretdevereaux.bsky.social
vdupras 11mo ago
This has to be related to Russia and the war in Ukraine. I'm not a military buff, so my analysis might be way off, but here we go. 1. The US has sent a shitload of weapons to Ukraine over the last years. 2. Given the US military superiority and how weak Russia is supposed to be, Russia should be on its knees right now. 3. The US is promoting a peace plan that seems to heavily favor Russia. So, at that point, I see two possibilities: 1. Trump is a russian asset 2. The US military is privately shitting its pants about how weak they are in this proxy war. Theoretically, if Trump was a russian asset, he wouldn't go after Venezuela. Why would Russia want to destroy its puppet state? So I'm going with 2, and it's the cold war again. This is an attempt by the US military to spread Russia thin for further conflicts coming all over the place.
- JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
  > US military is privately shitting its pants about how weak they are in this proxy war What? Our 90s air defences are shooting down Russia's bleeding-edge missiles. We're withholding Tomahawks because Putin throws a hissy fit every time it comes up because Russia's newest, shiniest air defence systems--the ones it has been selling for hundreds of millions of dollars to Iran and Venezuela--have been getting potted by homemade Ukranian SEAD tactics. Ukraine has exposed weaknesses in our drone arsenal. I bet China (or Venezuela) would have preferred to have encountered those weaknesses directly, but that's what you get for fucking around. Trump probably isn't a Russian asset. And the U.S. military isn't shitting itself over a spent conventional power.
  - vdupras 11mo ago
    I understand that this is the conventionally accepted version of the military situation in Ukraine. But if that's the case, why is US' peace proposal favorable to Russia? The US should be laughing at Russia's puny attempts to breach their invincible defenses.
    - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
      > if that's the case, why is US' peace proposal favorable to Russia? Because Trump wants to end the war to get a Nobel peace prize and Russia can plausibly unilaterally deliver that. What that means for Ukraine or Europe or frankly American strategic interests is not being considered because MAGA voters aren't exactly your internationally literate types. (Which is fine.) > US should be laughing at Russia's puny attempts to breach their invincible defenses Nobody is ever laughing in war. But to the extent we've had martial hilarity in the last few years, it's been in Russia mangling their elite forces in the failed sacking of Kyiv; Moscow almost getting bulldozed by Prighozin, a disaster stopped only because Belarus bailed Putin out; and potentially Indian warplanes' confused radio calls while Pakistan's integrated air defences potted them.
DrierCycle 11mo ago
When you are developing an autocratic regime within an elected system, criminal extralegal military action reveals who the leaders are who will act criminally (are "loyal") segregating them from the constitutional adherents who oppose you. It's a final step to overthrowing the US's elected officials or rendering them powerless.
jrepinc 11mo ago
Just more illegal and criminal regime change and foreign interference by USA. Can't they just leave the world alone and stop forcing their wants to the rest of the world for once. Really doing nothing but make them be even more hated.

41 points by clanky 11mo ago

ncr100 11mo ago

Maybe Epstein files are hiding in Maduro-land? /s Unnecessary waste of life, attention, money coming soon.

more_corn 11mo ago

Gunna go get that Nobel peace prize no matter who he has to blow up to find it.

jleyank 11mo ago
Somebody should convince the guy that it doesn't count ending a war that you started a little while before... Also, there has to be a general trend of peacefulness in one's behaviour.

JumpCrisscross 11mo ago

The only advantages I can see to America pushing for Maduro’s removal are unlocking mismanaged oil supplies and removing a hive of Russian, Iranian and Chinese activity from the Western Hemisphere. Those are the upsides. The downsides are prompting anti-American balancing moves across South America, Bay of Pigsing and increasing Maduro’s legitimacy, giving Russian air defences a paintbrush to our kit and fucking it up completely and sparking a refugee crisis. In practice, I’m increasingly convinced we’re about to go to war because of what a dead pedophile knows about the President.

cogman10 11mo ago
Don't forget the death and pointless carnage as downsides. Bombing fishing boats, saying it's "drugs" and using that to justify a war in our back-porch is insanity. Who even supports this? It seems like the most unjustified war we've ever started.
- amanaplanacanal 11mo ago
  This feels even more manufactured than the Iraq invasion. I don't understand why Trump would do something like this which is gonna peel off yet another group of his supporters. Maybe he just thinks he's invincible now? He must feel like this helps him politically somehow, but I can't figure out how.
  - deleted 11mo ago
    [deleted]
  - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
    > he must feel like this helps him politically somehow, but I can't figure out how Distracts from a tariff-ravaged economy and the Epstein files. Potentially lets him funnel defence spending to allies.
    - blibble 11mo ago
      > Potentially lets him funnel defence spending to allies. it won't have any even the UK has decided not to support the US regime on this one
      - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
        > it won't have any Political allies. David Sacks, et cetera.
    - derwiki 11mo ago
      Genuinely curious: what stats back up “tariff-ravaged economy”? S&P is essentially at an all-time high
      - crote 11mo ago
        And how much of that is felt by real-world people? The insane stock price of Nvidia & friends due to them passing around billions between each other doesn't matter even the slightest bit when your family business is going bankrupt.
tomatotomato37 11mo ago
Those upsides could have also been accomplished by pointing the CIA at Venezuela to do the same thing they've been doing across South America for the past fifty years.
- JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
  > Those upsides could have also been accomplished by pointing the CIA at Venezuela to do the same thing they've been doing across South America for the past fifty years Has the CIA actually advanced American interests in South America? Legitimate question. My layman's understanding is they serially fucked the theatres they were assigned to alongside America's reputation in exchange for, at best, short-term U.S. wins.
  - clanky 11mo ago
    "Has the CIA advanced American interests" is the wrong question. The CIA does not work for "The United States" proper, it works for a tiny section of it that comprises the ruling elites. Those people certainly enjoyed significant material benefits from CIA actions in Guatemala, Panama, El Salvador, etc.
    - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
      > CIA does not work for "The United States" proper, it works for a tiny section of it that comprises the ruling elites The CIA is popular with voters [1]. Not superbly. But more than the IRS, DoJ or Department of Education. [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/08/12/americans-see-many-federal-agencies-favorably-but-republicans-grow-more-critical-of-justice-department/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/08/12/americans...
      - clanky 11mo ago
        4 decades of James Bond, Tom Clancy, Homeland, Zero Dark Thirty ...
mc32 11mo ago
Does anyone down there even like Maduro? As far as I can tell even “sympathetic” regimes down there are not fond of how he’s running the place. Given that, any public sentiment supporting him would be counterfeit. Maduro has created an ongoing migrant crisis for a decade. Colombia, Chile, etc., are up to their gills in Venezuelan migrants already. Pretty sure lots of them would love to go back home if even a barely mediocre government replaced him. They said, it’s their mess. They should fix it by themselves —we don’t need to go in there. Let them figure it out.

coffinbirth 11mo ago

How is it possible that a president of a country can close the airspace of another country? How can the extrajudicial killings of (over 80 by now!) alleged drug traffickers without any charges or trials be justified or accepted? These are, in fact, crimes against humanity. I'm convinced at some point in the future U.S. citizens will have to learn what war means.

JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
> How is it possible that a president of a country can close the airspace of another country? To be fair, closing airspace before engaging in air operations is an international courtesy. It reduces the chances of downing civilian airliners. (In a similar vein, announcing closures and then not following through is incredibly damaging.) > alleged drug traffickers without any charges or trials be justified or accepted? These are, in fact, crimes against humanity They are war crimes. If you're concerned about it, call your representative and tell them you care about the American military committing war crimes. There is currently momentum on the issue [1]. [1] https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/30/war-crimes-hegseth-venezuela-strikes-00671160 https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/30/war-crimes-hegseth-...
- coffinbirth 11mo ago
  It cannot be a war crime if there is no war. There is no declaration of war and no approval of Congress. The ICC classified these strikes as crimes against humanity.
  - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
    > It cannot be a war crime if there is no war Is this true? Legitimate question. (Under U.S. law, I do believe they are war crimes given they're an abuse of war powers, whether exercised legally or not.) > ICC classified these strikes as crimes against humanity No, it did not. A "former chief prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC)" told the BBC "US air strikes on alleged drug smuggling boats would be treated under international law as crimes against humanity" [1]. I haven't seen the ICC take an official position on any of this, which is expected, since it's a judicial body that grinds deliberately. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd9kgqwnk8wo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd9kgqwnk8wo

mrlonglong 11mo ago

Destabilising south America like this will only entrench the cartels and bring the war right into the United States.

clanky 11mo ago
That will be a problem for South Americans and to a lesser extent you and me, not the ones pulling Trump's strings.
- JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
  > to a lesser extent you and me If this regime were capable of seeing past its own shoelaces, one could imagine a conspiracy to prompt a migrant crisis so the GOP has an issue its trusted by voters on.
tim333 11mo ago
In theory they get Maduro to >leave Venezuela immediately to allow the restoration of democratic rule and then sunshine and unicorns ensue.
matheusmoreira 11mo ago
The cartels are already entrenched. Organized drug gangs already dominate over a quarter of the south american continent. People openly speculate about how they control judges and politicians, and I don't doubt it for a second. If the US manages to deal a crippling blow to these drug gangs, he will have done south america a huge favor and I will be forever indebted to him.
- mrlonglong 11mo ago
  What do you make of Trump pardoning a convicted drug kingpin who was once a President then?
  - matheusmoreira 11mo ago
    I'm not even going to try to justify that. I understand that Trump's war on drugs is probably just a pretext to increase their dominion over south america. They probably want Venezuela's oil too. None of that matters as far as I'm concerned. Here in south america things are way too fucked up to care about that stuff. South america has plenty of violent narcostates headed by literal communist dictators. Venezuela is just one of them, and my own country is rapidly following in its footsteps. It's gotten to the point the USA nuking them all into submission would be a huge improvement to the status quo. Being a US vassal state is preferable to living under a barbarous narcostate shithole. The reasons they use to rationalize the attack are irrelevant to me. I'll be happy so long as they get rid of all these narcocommunists.

DustinEchoes 11mo ago

“No new wars”

cosmicgadget 11mo ago
"This war was started by the cartels and corrupt Maduro regime under Sleepy Joe Biden." Or something similar. His base will not give it a second thought.

bithavoc 11mo ago

The US has seen six governments since Woodstock ‘99, alternating the ruling party almost perfectly every four years: Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden and Trump again. Venezuela has seen only two presidents in 26 years, Chavez and Maduro, and both belong to the same ruling party.

PieTime 11mo ago
And some US allies have seen no change, I’m hoping that’s not a metric for which countries to invade.
tastyface 11mo ago
You have stated a fact but provided no conclusion. Please finish your thought.
- bithavoc 11mo ago
  exactly, there’s no conclusion, it’s been almost three decades. It’s nice to have a different ruling party every few years and not just every three decades like in Venezuela(so far). Maybe Venezuelas want to give their oil to another 3rd-party that is not Iran, Cuba, Russia or China for a change.
  - tastyface 11mo ago
    So, in other words, you believe we should attack Venezuela because they need a regime change and we need their oil. I have some choice words for that, but the mods wouldn't like it.
    - bithavoc 11mo ago
      You’re not providing a conclusion. Please finish your thought…
rchaud 11mo ago
So have Russia, Israel, Egypt and several other nations. I don't see the US cutting military aid to the latter two because of a lack of diverse electoral outcomes.

general1465 11mo ago

So mad king will cause rally around the flag in Venezuela. And then what? Another Vietnam? China and Russia will be more than happy to supply drones and weapons to grind US military in an endless insurgency. Russia especially, to just give USA a taste of a shitsandwich they are forced to eat for 4 years straight.

m0llusk 11mo ago
Then he chickens out on Tuesday as usual, that's what.
JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
> Russia especially Russia is in no position to help Maduro, they're currently being bailed out by Tehran and Pyongyang. China could, and it's genuinely interesting to see them sitting it out so far [1]. [1] https://www.wsj.com/world/americas/why-russia-and-china-are-sitting-out-venezuelas-clash-with-trump-0fcc7710 https://www.wsj.com/world/americas/why-russia-and-china-are-...
Balgair 11mo ago
"Surely a quick, violent, successful war of aggression is just what the ruler needs to shore up his legitimacy," said just about every failed monarch in history shortly before invading Serbia. https://bsky.app/profile/bretdevereaux.bsky.social https://bsky.app/profile/bretdevereaux.bsky.social

vdupras 11mo ago

This has to be related to Russia and the war in Ukraine. I'm not a military buff, so my analysis might be way off, but here we go. 1. The US has sent a shitload of weapons to Ukraine over the last years. 2. Given the US military superiority and how weak Russia is supposed to be, Russia should be on its knees right now. 3. The US is promoting a peace plan that seems to heavily favor Russia. So, at that point, I see two possibilities: 1. Trump is a russian asset 2. The US military is privately shitting its pants about how weak they are in this proxy war. Theoretically, if Trump was a russian asset, he wouldn't go after Venezuela. Why would Russia want to destroy its puppet state? So I'm going with 2, and it's the cold war again. This is an attempt by the US military to spread Russia thin for further conflicts coming all over the place.

JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
> US military is privately shitting its pants about how weak they are in this proxy war What? Our 90s air defences are shooting down Russia's bleeding-edge missiles. We're withholding Tomahawks because Putin throws a hissy fit every time it comes up because Russia's newest, shiniest air defence systems--the ones it has been selling for hundreds of millions of dollars to Iran and Venezuela--have been getting potted by homemade Ukranian SEAD tactics. Ukraine has exposed weaknesses in our drone arsenal. I bet China (or Venezuela) would have preferred to have encountered those weaknesses directly, but that's what you get for fucking around. Trump probably isn't a Russian asset. And the U.S. military isn't shitting itself over a spent conventional power.
- vdupras 11mo ago
  I understand that this is the conventionally accepted version of the military situation in Ukraine. But if that's the case, why is US' peace proposal favorable to Russia? The US should be laughing at Russia's puny attempts to breach their invincible defenses.
  - JumpCrisscross 11mo ago
    > if that's the case, why is US' peace proposal favorable to Russia? Because Trump wants to end the war to get a Nobel peace prize and Russia can plausibly unilaterally deliver that. What that means for Ukraine or Europe or frankly American strategic interests is not being considered because MAGA voters aren't exactly your internationally literate types. (Which is fine.) > US should be laughing at Russia's puny attempts to breach their invincible defenses Nobody is ever laughing in war. But to the extent we've had martial hilarity in the last few years, it's been in Russia mangling their elite forces in the failed sacking of Kyiv; Moscow almost getting bulldozed by Prighozin, a disaster stopped only because Belarus bailed Putin out; and potentially Indian warplanes' confused radio calls while Pakistan's integrated air defences potted them.

DrierCycle 11mo ago

When you are developing an autocratic regime within an elected system, criminal extralegal military action reveals who the leaders are who will act criminally (are "loyal") segregating them from the constitutional adherents who oppose you. It's a final step to overthrowing the US's elected officials or rendering them powerless.

jrepinc 11mo ago

Just more illegal and criminal regime change and foreign interference by USA. Can't they just leave the world alone and stop forcing their wants to the rest of the world for once. Really doing nothing but make them be even more hated.