14 ms·

They haven’t removed the government. They removed Maduro. Very different.

adventured 9mo ago
And it appears they did so with assistance from within the government, at least with assistance from the military. That's why the operation went so smoothly. It seems like it was unusually easy, precisely because it was.
- grufkork 9mo ago
  Any details/sources on this? I thought it was strange that the airspace seemed almost entirely uncontested. Scrambling fighters take a while of course (particularly if unmaintained and you're corrupt), but I had at least expected some ground-based air defences to be active. Maybe they were being blown up in the first few videos that surfaced? Unless they were disabled by other means, that's another catastrophic display of the Russian systems.
  - ethbr1 9mo ago
    Caracas was definitely hit in preparation for the operation, and I'd assume air defenses and assets within scramble range were the primary targets. Example footage that seems to track with BBC confirmed Caracas strike locations: https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2007340229536239646 https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2007340229536239646 The US had previously positioned a lot of USAF and Army air assets in Puerto Rico and on offshore platforms: https://www.twz.com/news-features/cv-22b-osprey-mc-130j-commando-ii-special-ops-aircraft-deploy-to-puerto-rico https://www.twz.com/news-features/cv-22b-osprey-mc-130j-comm... Those appear to have been used: https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2007339573156950095 https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2007339573156950095 In addition, USAF/USN have been flying ELINT platforms (e.g. RC-135s) off the coast for months now. So even without the cooperation of any of the Venezuelan military, it's possible the mission was: 1. Precision long-range strikes on air defense radars around Caracas (and possibly assets) 2. Closer SEAD with F-35s to clear a path 3. SOAR Delta Force infiltration with tactical air suppression 4. CAP from F-35s to intercept any scrambled fighters 5. Exfiltration along same route If the intelligence was good (location of air defenses and Maduro), it's entirely possible the above just went off cleanly. See: Desert Storm air campaign. Having capable anti-air assets doesn't matter when your enemy has access to more timely intelligence and the means to do something with it.
  - codingbot3000 9mo ago
    "catastrophic display of the Russian systems." - that, or the Russians actually helped the Americans...
    - grufkork 9mo ago
      I think that might be a step too far, rather I'd guess the US just knows the Russian systems very well. The success of the latest campaign against Iran shows that too, and if anything they learnt even more from that. Either way, although Trump might every now and then be a bit too friendly with Putin, but a) cooperation at this scale and b) the bad looks and damage to Russian investments I think makes it seem unlikely. Putin doesn't stick his neck out for others unless it serves him. I'm not that well read on the Russian involvement in the area though...
  - deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
- VectorLock 9mo ago
  Thats what I'm most curious about right now, did they completely suppress Venezuela's air defenses or were they turned off?
  - breppp 9mo ago
    https://theaviationist.com/2011/05/18/mh-47x/ https://theaviationist.com/2011/05/18/mh-47x/
  - structuredPizza 9mo ago
    Always soften the target before anything happens, no need to suppress when nothing is active.
  - trothamel 9mo ago
    It would not surprise me if it was a mix of both. (Portions of the military stood down, and the more loyal aspects were suppressed.)
sandworm101 9mo ago
Not yet. Once the anger metastasizes into a new wholly anti-american government, new targets will emerge. Trump is far from universally loved, but just imagine what the US would become if an outside nation swooped in and captured him. 100% of the american people would be screaming for blood.
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
- macintux 9mo ago
  > 100% of the american people would be screaming for blood. Honestly, at this point, I wouldn't be one of them.
- empthought 9mo ago
  I would not be screaming for blood. It is the world order he wants, and perhaps the only possible lesson in why we shouldn’t give him that world order.
  - JKCalhoun 9mo ago
    Most polls put it at 30%. (And 30% of those that could vote, didn't—so here we are.)
- coldpie 9mo ago
  > 100% of the american people would be screaming for blood. Absolutely not. I'd be out celebrating.
  - sandworm101 9mo ago
    People say that, but the sight of say Russian/Mexican/Chinese/Canadian troops parachuting onto the whitehouse lawn to abduct a sitting president, no doubt killing many in the process, would be such an afront that domestic politics wouldnt matter.
    - 9mo ago
serial_dev 9mo ago
While it's true that so far they only removed Maduro, removing a sitting president and his wife is a show of power, it's a "we do whatever we want". What is stopping the US to remove the next person, and continue doing so until as they find someone that they like? Or to organize an up-rising or a coup? The writing is on the wall.
- clanky 9mo ago
  [flagged]
  - case 9mo ago
    > This looks a lot like when the U.S. & Israel were running dry on interceptors last year, and made a deal with the Iranians to pretend to blow up Fordow in exchange for ceasing hostilities. Do you have a citation for this? (Genuinely curious)
    - clanky 9mo ago
      [flagged]
      - ethbr1 9mo ago
        > the silence of the Iranian government on this point suggests something coordinated to me Or, you know, a theocratic autocracy that realizes the perception of its military power is critical to keeping the populace in line? And admitting to an inability to stop military action on one of their most heavily defended targets by the very enemy they've whipped their supporters into a froth over is a bad look?
        clanky 9mo ago
        In your zeal you seem to have misunderstood the point I was making. The Iranian government did not dispute American claims of having flown over and destroyed Fordow, which is the opposite of the "they'll say anything to look strong" thesis you're advancing. I think the U.S. whipped the Iranian government's supporters into line by treacherously using peace negotiations as a pretext to target their scientists, helping Israel launch a completely unjustified sneak attack with all the Mossad rats they had hidden in the country, and facilitating the genocide in Gaza. With enemies like that the Iranian government hardly needs help.
kijin 9mo ago
Equating a person with the government or the nation is a common trait among autocrats. L'État, c'est moi.
- lo_zamoyski 9mo ago
  Not quite... Medieval kings were considered the embodiment of the government, but that didn't make them autocratic. Indeed, they were not only bound by a thicket of obligations and customs, but authority itself is only legitimate when it is just, a view that is traditional; it is modern legal positivism that roots authority in fiat, making it inherently tyrannical.
  - danans 9mo ago
    > Indeed, they were not only bound by a thicket of obligations and customs, but authority itself is only legitimate when it is just, a view that is traditional; Ultimately they were bound not by tradition, but by the reality that they may lose their heads, often at the hands of a competing relative, but also at the hands of starving subjects.
layer8 9mo ago
Update from Reuters: ‘"We're going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition," Trump told reporters. […] "We can't take a chance at somebody else takes over Venezuela that doesn't have the good of the Venezuelan people in mind. We've had decades of that. We're not going to let that happen."’
- lynndotpy 9mo ago
  I'd like to stress that Trump not only said this during the conference from his luxury resort, but repeated and belabored the point several times that the United States would be taking over Venezuela. (edit - whoops)
  - fhdkweig 9mo ago
    Could you please re-edit this comment? I think you forgot a word towards the end.
    - lynndotpy 9mo ago
      Whoops, my bad, thank you! Fixed
  - jacquesm 9mo ago
    Entirely unexpected. /s
Braxton1980 9mo ago
"Trump says US will ‘run’ Venezuela until ‘judicious transition’ following capture of Maduro" https://www.cnn.com/world/live-news/venezuela-explosions-caracas-intl-hnk-01-03-26 https://www.cnn.com/world/live-news/venezuela-explosions-car...
- jacquesm 9mo ago
  That might be a while then, it will take some time to get that oil out.
  - mapontosevenths 9mo ago
    He's trying to hide the impact his failed economic policies are having. He can't let the 16 Nobel Prize winning economists who warned him that he'd crash the economy "win." https://assets.bwbx.io/documents/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/rh1YcFoC_lH8/v0 https://assets.bwbx.io/documents/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/rh1YcFoC...

And it appears they did so with assistance from within the government, at least with assistance from the military. That's why the operation went so smoothly. It seems like it was unusually easy, precisely because it was.

grufkork 9mo ago
Any details/sources on this? I thought it was strange that the airspace seemed almost entirely uncontested. Scrambling fighters take a while of course (particularly if unmaintained and you're corrupt), but I had at least expected some ground-based air defences to be active. Maybe they were being blown up in the first few videos that surfaced? Unless they were disabled by other means, that's another catastrophic display of the Russian systems.
- ethbr1 9mo ago
  Caracas was definitely hit in preparation for the operation, and I'd assume air defenses and assets within scramble range were the primary targets. Example footage that seems to track with BBC confirmed Caracas strike locations: https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2007340229536239646 https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2007340229536239646 The US had previously positioned a lot of USAF and Army air assets in Puerto Rico and on offshore platforms: https://www.twz.com/news-features/cv-22b-osprey-mc-130j-commando-ii-special-ops-aircraft-deploy-to-puerto-rico https://www.twz.com/news-features/cv-22b-osprey-mc-130j-comm... Those appear to have been used: https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2007339573156950095 https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2007339573156950095 In addition, USAF/USN have been flying ELINT platforms (e.g. RC-135s) off the coast for months now. So even without the cooperation of any of the Venezuelan military, it's possible the mission was: 1. Precision long-range strikes on air defense radars around Caracas (and possibly assets) 2. Closer SEAD with F-35s to clear a path 3. SOAR Delta Force infiltration with tactical air suppression 4. CAP from F-35s to intercept any scrambled fighters 5. Exfiltration along same route If the intelligence was good (location of air defenses and Maduro), it's entirely possible the above just went off cleanly. See: Desert Storm air campaign. Having capable anti-air assets doesn't matter when your enemy has access to more timely intelligence and the means to do something with it.
- codingbot3000 9mo ago
  "catastrophic display of the Russian systems." - that, or the Russians actually helped the Americans...
  - grufkork 9mo ago
    I think that might be a step too far, rather I'd guess the US just knows the Russian systems very well. The success of the latest campaign against Iran shows that too, and if anything they learnt even more from that. Either way, although Trump might every now and then be a bit too friendly with Putin, but a) cooperation at this scale and b) the bad looks and damage to Russian investments I think makes it seem unlikely. Putin doesn't stick his neck out for others unless it serves him. I'm not that well read on the Russian involvement in the area though...
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
VectorLock 9mo ago
Thats what I'm most curious about right now, did they completely suppress Venezuela's air defenses or were they turned off?
- breppp 9mo ago
  https://theaviationist.com/2011/05/18/mh-47x/ https://theaviationist.com/2011/05/18/mh-47x/
- structuredPizza 9mo ago
  Always soften the target before anything happens, no need to suppress when nothing is active.
- trothamel 9mo ago
  It would not surprise me if it was a mix of both. (Portions of the military stood down, and the more loyal aspects were suppressed.)

sandworm101 9mo ago

Not yet. Once the anger metastasizes into a new wholly anti-american government, new targets will emerge. Trump is far from universally loved, but just imagine what the US would become if an outside nation swooped in and captured him. 100% of the american people would be screaming for blood.

deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]
macintux 9mo ago
> 100% of the american people would be screaming for blood. Honestly, at this point, I wouldn't be one of them.
empthought 9mo ago
I would not be screaming for blood. It is the world order he wants, and perhaps the only possible lesson in why we shouldn’t give him that world order.
- JKCalhoun 9mo ago
  Most polls put it at 30%. (And 30% of those that could vote, didn't—so here we are.)
coldpie 9mo ago
> 100% of the american people would be screaming for blood. Absolutely not. I'd be out celebrating.
- sandworm101 9mo ago
  People say that, but the sight of say Russian/Mexican/Chinese/Canadian troops parachuting onto the whitehouse lawn to abduct a sitting president, no doubt killing many in the process, would be such an afront that domestic politics wouldnt matter.
  - 9mo ago

serial_dev 9mo ago

While it's true that so far they only removed Maduro, removing a sitting president and his wife is a show of power, it's a "we do whatever we want". What is stopping the US to remove the next person, and continue doing so until as they find someone that they like? Or to organize an up-rising or a coup? The writing is on the wall.

clanky 9mo ago
[flagged]
- case 9mo ago
  > This looks a lot like when the U.S. & Israel were running dry on interceptors last year, and made a deal with the Iranians to pretend to blow up Fordow in exchange for ceasing hostilities. Do you have a citation for this? (Genuinely curious)
  - clanky 9mo ago
    [flagged]
    - ethbr1 9mo ago
      > the silence of the Iranian government on this point suggests something coordinated to me Or, you know, a theocratic autocracy that realizes the perception of its military power is critical to keeping the populace in line? And admitting to an inability to stop military action on one of their most heavily defended targets by the very enemy they've whipped their supporters into a froth over is a bad look?
      - clanky 9mo ago
        In your zeal you seem to have misunderstood the point I was making. The Iranian government did not dispute American claims of having flown over and destroyed Fordow, which is the opposite of the "they'll say anything to look strong" thesis you're advancing. I think the U.S. whipped the Iranian government's supporters into line by treacherously using peace negotiations as a pretext to target their scientists, helping Israel launch a completely unjustified sneak attack with all the Mossad rats they had hidden in the country, and facilitating the genocide in Gaza. With enemies like that the Iranian government hardly needs help.

kijin 9mo ago

Equating a person with the government or the nation is a common trait among autocrats. L'État, c'est moi.

lo_zamoyski 9mo ago
Not quite... Medieval kings were considered the embodiment of the government, but that didn't make them autocratic. Indeed, they were not only bound by a thicket of obligations and customs, but authority itself is only legitimate when it is just, a view that is traditional; it is modern legal positivism that roots authority in fiat, making it inherently tyrannical.
- danans 9mo ago
  > Indeed, they were not only bound by a thicket of obligations and customs, but authority itself is only legitimate when it is just, a view that is traditional; Ultimately they were bound not by tradition, but by the reality that they may lose their heads, often at the hands of a competing relative, but also at the hands of starving subjects.

layer8 9mo ago

Update from Reuters: ‘"We're going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition," Trump told reporters. […] "We can't take a chance at somebody else takes over Venezuela that doesn't have the good of the Venezuelan people in mind. We've had decades of that. We're not going to let that happen."’

lynndotpy 9mo ago
I'd like to stress that Trump not only said this during the conference from his luxury resort, but repeated and belabored the point several times that the United States would be taking over Venezuela. (edit - whoops)
- fhdkweig 9mo ago
  Could you please re-edit this comment? I think you forgot a word towards the end.
  - lynndotpy 9mo ago
    Whoops, my bad, thank you! Fixed
- jacquesm 9mo ago
  Entirely unexpected. /s

Braxton1980 9mo ago

"Trump says US will ‘run’ Venezuela until ‘judicious transition’ following capture of Maduro" https://www.cnn.com/world/live-news/venezuela-explosions-caracas-intl-hnk-01-03-26 https://www.cnn.com/world/live-news/venezuela-explosions-car...

jacquesm 9mo ago
That might be a while then, it will take some time to get that oil out.
- mapontosevenths 9mo ago
  He's trying to hide the impact his failed economic policies are having. He can't let the 16 Nobel Prize winning economists who warned him that he'd crash the economy "win." https://assets.bwbx.io/documents/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/rh1YcFoC_lH8/v0 https://assets.bwbx.io/documents/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/rh1YcFoC...