5 ms·

> I could easily see situations where some of these could be beneficial for the greater good. The greater good of whom? Regardless, we have international organ

by ciconia 9mo ago

> I could easily see situations where some of these could be beneficial for the greater good. The greater good of whom? Regardless, we have international organizations where action can be taken by a coalition is states, which provides not only legitimacy but also some level of judicial control. This is so obviously an imperialist power play for the world's largest oil reserves. That some would portray this as acting for the greater good is beyond ridiculous.

ebr4him 9mo ago
[flagged]
- plufz 9mo ago
  To be fair we don’t know the atrocities the US would have committed in those regions if the UN didn’t exist. I’m not saying I know either obviously! But it’s not like the world seemed to be a better place before the UN.
assimpleaspossi 9mo ago
Mr. Zelensky would like to have a word.
card_zero 9mo ago
> world's largest oil reserves With no infrastructure, and ten years of massive investment needed, I read. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy95pr790pro https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy95pr790pro
- immibis 9mo ago
  All they have to do is keep power for ten years and keep renewables being illegal (Trump already banned offshore wind turbines because he can see some from one of his overseas golf courses)
- tdeck 9mo ago
  Sounds like an opportunity for some lucrative contracts to go to US companies, while forcing the new Venezuelan government to foot the bill.
  - card_zero 9mo ago
    OK, but the other piece of international aggression in the news recently was yesterday, when Trump promised that the US would "come to the rescue" of protestors in Iran if the regime starts killing them. Possibly this and Venezuela are related, and oil is involved, but in a strategic way rather than any immediately rewarding treasure-seeking.
  - monerozcash 9mo ago
    Which would happen anyway because only US companies are (maybe) capable of extracting Venezuelan crude at a profit.
    - xg15 9mo ago
      Interesting to keep reading the narrative about the supposedly worthless Venezuelan oil here. So worthless that the US has to block sales with an embargo and is starting a war over it, apparently.
      - monerozcash 9mo ago
        It's not a narrative, it's a fact you can easily verify by accessing the internet using the device in front of you. The idea that oil in Venezuela is particularly attractive to anyone is patently absurd. Crude oil prices are already at uncomfortable levels for producers with significantly higher margins, and the situation isn't going to get any better. >and is starting a war over it Anyone who in 2025 still blindly believes what Donald Trump says is an idiot. And even if that were true, you'd still be an idiot for assuming that Trumps motivations are grounded in reality.
        fennecbutt 9mo ago
- dghlsakjg 9mo ago
  From your source: "Venezuela, for the American oil companies, will be a field day," Florida Republican congresswoman María Elvira Salazar said in a recent interview on Fox Business. "American companies can go in and fix all the oil pipes, the whole oil rigs and everything that has to do with... oil and the derivatives." Trump might seem open to such arguments. He campaigned on the slogan "drill, baby, drill" and has generally called for expanding oil production, which he has tied to lower prices for Americans. /quote It then goes on to note that output could be more than doubled in two years. That alone would put them as the 11th largest oil producer and the third largest in the Americas. The decade timeline and budget was for creating maximalist infrastructure for fully exploiting the resources. The strongest proof that the article has that trump isn’t interested in oil is his word that he isn’t interested in oil. How much faith do you put in Trump’s honesty?
  - card_zero 9mo ago
    The 2023 Trump quote is "We would have taken over it, we would have kept all that oil". But I think war-for-oil explanations are too pat, generally. Just because he shamelessly says the oil is a motivation doesn't mean it makes sense as a motivation.
    - dghlsakjg 9mo ago
      He said it then, he said it now, everyone else in the know is saying it. Trump has openly declared his intent to go after numerous other country’s mineral and oil resources leveraging military force if necessary. (Ukraine, Canada, Denmark off the top of my head). Why should I think that a man who sees everything through the lens of power and money has not just made a power and money play after spending a year promising to do just that. I don’t doubt that other motivations exist. I do not think that the US would have gone after them if they did not have oil. I do not think the US government would be crowing about all the money they will finally be able to make with oil, if that wasn’t a motivation.
    - jacquesm 9mo ago
      dumber than a box of rocks.

by ciconia 9mo ago

ebr4him 9mo ago

[flagged]

plufz 9mo ago
To be fair we don’t know the atrocities the US would have committed in those regions if the UN didn’t exist. I’m not saying I know either obviously! But it’s not like the world seemed to be a better place before the UN.

assimpleaspossi 9mo ago

Mr. Zelensky would like to have a word.

card_zero 9mo ago

> world's largest oil reserves With no infrastructure, and ten years of massive investment needed, I read. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy95pr790pro https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy95pr790pro

immibis 9mo ago
All they have to do is keep power for ten years and keep renewables being illegal (Trump already banned offshore wind turbines because he can see some from one of his overseas golf courses)
tdeck 9mo ago
Sounds like an opportunity for some lucrative contracts to go to US companies, while forcing the new Venezuelan government to foot the bill.
- card_zero 9mo ago
  OK, but the other piece of international aggression in the news recently was yesterday, when Trump promised that the US would "come to the rescue" of protestors in Iran if the regime starts killing them. Possibly this and Venezuela are related, and oil is involved, but in a strategic way rather than any immediately rewarding treasure-seeking.
- monerozcash 9mo ago
  Which would happen anyway because only US companies are (maybe) capable of extracting Venezuelan crude at a profit.
  - xg15 9mo ago
    Interesting to keep reading the narrative about the supposedly worthless Venezuelan oil here. So worthless that the US has to block sales with an embargo and is starting a war over it, apparently.
    - monerozcash 9mo ago
      It's not a narrative, it's a fact you can easily verify by accessing the internet using the device in front of you. The idea that oil in Venezuela is particularly attractive to anyone is patently absurd. Crude oil prices are already at uncomfortable levels for producers with significantly higher margins, and the situation isn't going to get any better. >and is starting a war over it Anyone who in 2025 still blindly believes what Donald Trump says is an idiot. And even if that were true, you'd still be an idiot for assuming that Trumps motivations are grounded in reality.
      - fennecbutt 9mo ago
dghlsakjg 9mo ago
From your source: "Venezuela, for the American oil companies, will be a field day," Florida Republican congresswoman María Elvira Salazar said in a recent interview on Fox Business. "American companies can go in and fix all the oil pipes, the whole oil rigs and everything that has to do with... oil and the derivatives." Trump might seem open to such arguments. He campaigned on the slogan "drill, baby, drill" and has generally called for expanding oil production, which he has tied to lower prices for Americans. /quote It then goes on to note that output could be more than doubled in two years. That alone would put them as the 11th largest oil producer and the third largest in the Americas. The decade timeline and budget was for creating maximalist infrastructure for fully exploiting the resources. The strongest proof that the article has that trump isn’t interested in oil is his word that he isn’t interested in oil. How much faith do you put in Trump’s honesty?
- card_zero 9mo ago
  The 2023 Trump quote is "We would have taken over it, we would have kept all that oil". But I think war-for-oil explanations are too pat, generally. Just because he shamelessly says the oil is a motivation doesn't mean it makes sense as a motivation.
  - dghlsakjg 9mo ago
    He said it then, he said it now, everyone else in the know is saying it. Trump has openly declared his intent to go after numerous other country’s mineral and oil resources leveraging military force if necessary. (Ukraine, Canada, Denmark off the top of my head). Why should I think that a man who sees everything through the lens of power and money has not just made a power and money play after spending a year promising to do just that. I don’t doubt that other motivations exist. I do not think that the US would have gone after them if they did not have oil. I do not think the US government would be crowing about all the money they will finally be able to make with oil, if that wasn’t a motivation.
  - jacquesm 9mo ago
    dumber than a box of rocks.