3 ms·
I mean technically US doesn't have to go to war in land, if they sink the navy(which would be accomplished in minutes) then all Venezuelan oil is trapped in cou
by pixl97 11mo ago
I mean technically US doesn't have to go to war in land, if they sink the navy(which would be accomplished in minutes) then all Venezuelan oil is trapped in country and they go bankrupt.
- bmandale 11mo agoIf they go bankrupt, then they start using russian missiles to blow up US aircraft carriers. This is a war that neither side wants to win.
- jmpman 11mo agoOnce the US has air superiority, they don’t need their aircraft carriers anywhere close to Venezuela territory. The submarine fleet alone can enforce a blockade.
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- bmandale 11mo agoPoint is, a blockade in and of itself is an act of war, and will get the corresponding response. You cannot hope to just starve them out. You can go full ham if you'd like, but that will also get a corresponding response. If you just want "a bit" of war, then you need to leave them an out. All moot now, as anyone could have predicted, but it was fun to think about.
- pixl97 11mo agoLol, ya, that's not how air / naval superiority works. Any missile launch platforms get cooked quickly by US planes.
- Qem 11mo agoCould the buyers just send their own ships to retrieve oil from Venezuela? Say, China sends a oil tanker, I imagine it would be trickier for US Navy to just sink or steal it.