6 ms·

Iraq was never a democracy. It bounced from monarchy to military rule to one party rule to Hussein's personal dictatorship. Venezuela had a... let's call it "r

Iraq was never a democracy. It bounced from monarchy to military rule to one party rule to Hussein's personal dictatorship. Venezuela had a... let's call it "respectable" democracy since the late 50s. Chavez did it no favors but it didn't completely collapse until Maduro. If Venezuela recovers and improves, are you willing to fundamentally change your opinion about US interventions?

estearum 10mo ago
> If Venezuela recovers and improves, are you willing to fundamentally change your opinion about US interventions? Uhh, no? My opinion is that US interventions are incredibly risky. There have been numerous successes. There have also been numerous failures. Both have required immense resources and focus from us. Some interventions are worth the risk, and others are not. I have not seen any compelling rationale for the risk-reward of this particular intervention, and have very low hopes for the follow through, which makes the risk-reward calculus even worse.
- mupuff1234 10mo ago
  You don't think Venezuela having the largest oils reserves on the planet and it being a strong ally to Russia, Iran and China make the possible reward fairly significant from a US standpoint?
  - estearum 10mo ago
    Sure it's conceivable. Can you go a level deeper on your analysis? Are you suggesting that cutting off oil flow to those nations will be advantageous to us? Is this like... tomorrow? During a potential armed conflict? When? By what specific mechanism does the US assert "control" over the oil? POTUS just now said it's via a ground occupation "until transition of power." What's the transition plan?
    - mupuff1234 10mo ago
      Not cutting off, but it's enough that the US increases oil supply which lowers the prices to significantly hurt Russia and Iran. And then you have China which is the main consumer of Venezuelan oil so you get another point of leverage. Also probably helps to ensure the petro dollar is here to stay for longer. Obviously this is a very shallow analysis, and there's definitely significant risks, but I do think it's obvious that it has large potential upsides.
      - estearum 10mo ago
        Well... POTUS just said that the plan is to sell large amounts of Venezuelan oil to China and Russia. So again: conceivably sure, but the details matter. The details we have right now do not look very promising IMO.
      - jacquesm 10mo ago
        It's not shallow, it is gullible. Of course Trump has an angle otherwise he wouldn't have done this. We can speculate about what the angle is but there is absolutely no way that he did this for the good of the Venezuelan population. Edit: So, that took only 8 minutes, the other shoe just dropped, it was about the oil after all. Where do I collect my check?
        mupuff1234 10mo ago
        Oh yeah, I'm certain the intent behind this wasn't for the sake of the Venezuelan population, but that in itself doesn't mean it won't result in a better outcome for the population (but also not saying that it will)
        stickfigure 10mo ago
        The thing I occasionally say about Trump is: "Even a stopped clock is right twice a day." We ("the opposition") can't get into the frame where we say that everything Trump does is wrong. It's not frequent, but sometimes - yes even for totally wrong reasons - he does things which are probably right. Our identity needs to be more than just "the opposite of what Trump does", otherwise the Trumpists will frame all debates around issues that make us look crazy, rather than the issues that demonstrate blatant grift and criminality. If Maduro is gone, it's a good thing. Let's go back to talking about the clear and obviously terrible things Trump does. Don't let them change the subject.
  - JKCalhoun 10mo ago
    "…it being a strong ally to Russia, Iran and China…" You're making a pretty good case for high risk.
    - mupuff1234 10mo ago
      You could easily say the same thing about not doing anything. But also remember that Russia is occupied in Ukraine and couldn't even help the Assad regime which was a much closer ally, and same with Iran.
      - cloverich 10mo ago
        i think the argument is Venezuela can help - or hurt - Russia.
        NicoJuicy 10mo ago
        This is all about China, not Russia
  - ElectricalUnion 10mo ago
    > strong ally to Russia, Iran and China It's more like (similar to other sanctioned countries) "forcibly coerced by the USA into being a ally of Russia, Iran and China by sanctions".
- JKCalhoun 10mo ago
  Agree. If I wear a blindfold, cross a highway and am not hit by a car, am I willing to concede that crossing the highway blindfolded is safe?
- singpolyma3 10mo ago
  Since the purpose of the interventions is to get more access for US oil companies, they are always successes
jacquesm 10mo ago
Ethics debates are not served by utilitarian arguments.
- andsoitis 10mo ago
  > Ethics debates are not served by utilitarian arguments. There isn't just a single universally agreed upon moral framework that serves as the basis for ethics. Depending on whether you adopt a Rawlsian, Utilitarian, Libertarian, or Communitarian moral framework, your actions would look different depending on the circumstances. Specially, the Utilitarian moral framework optimizes for the greatest good for the greatest number. Willing to sacrifice the few of the many. It might not be your or my moral framework, but I don't know that we can rule it out as a valid way to approach ethics.
  - jacquesm 10mo ago
    > Specially, the Utilitarian moral framework optimizes for the greatest good for the greatest number. No, the proponents of the utilitarian moral framework try to justify illegal actions retrospectively if the outcome was good and refuse to take responsibility if it is bad. Ethics should guide your decisions beforehand and require you to take responsibility for all possible outcomes.
    - andsoitis 10mo ago
      Not sure I follow your line of thinking. Are you arguing that Utilitarianism isn't a way to guide decisions? And are you saying it is an invalid moral framework? FWIW, many ethicists suggest using multiple frameworks and would argue using Utilitarianism for policy. For example, in the EU utilitarianism is rarely used as the sole moral foundation but serves as the primary tool for practical decision-making and public policy. Most visible in how the EU balances competing interests to achieve the "greatest good".
      - card_zero 10mo ago
        There's a lot of unprincipled ethicists around.
Hikikomori 10mo ago
Ah so US will allow Venezuela to profit from their own oil? This time surely
- jacquesm 10mo ago
  I can't wait for the Total Energies or Shell Oil announcement.
  - Hikikomori 10mo ago
    With investments from Kushners Saudi fund.
    - JKCalhoun 10mo ago
      You know there are boardroom meetings going on right now…
      - jacquesm 10mo ago
        100% on the money this comment. This is all about the spoils and absolutely not about the people or the drugs. Thinking about this some more: good chance this whole thing was decided in a board room a while ago.
- qcnguy 10mo ago
  Yes it will. Iraqi government budget is ~88% funded by oil revenues.
  - amanaplanacanal 10mo ago
    I'm not sure using examples from the bush administration are necessarily relevant to the actions of the trump administration.
catlifeonmars 10mo ago
> Iraq was never a democracy. It bounced from monarchy to military rule to one party rule to Hussein's personal dictatorship. In reference to this, have you seen the footage of Saddam Hussein taking power? It’s chilling.

estearum 10mo ago

> If Venezuela recovers and improves, are you willing to fundamentally change your opinion about US interventions? Uhh, no? My opinion is that US interventions are incredibly risky. There have been numerous successes. There have also been numerous failures. Both have required immense resources and focus from us. Some interventions are worth the risk, and others are not. I have not seen any compelling rationale for the risk-reward of this particular intervention, and have very low hopes for the follow through, which makes the risk-reward calculus even worse.

mupuff1234 10mo ago
You don't think Venezuela having the largest oils reserves on the planet and it being a strong ally to Russia, Iran and China make the possible reward fairly significant from a US standpoint?
- estearum 10mo ago
  Sure it's conceivable. Can you go a level deeper on your analysis? Are you suggesting that cutting off oil flow to those nations will be advantageous to us? Is this like... tomorrow? During a potential armed conflict? When? By what specific mechanism does the US assert "control" over the oil? POTUS just now said it's via a ground occupation "until transition of power." What's the transition plan?
  - mupuff1234 10mo ago
    Not cutting off, but it's enough that the US increases oil supply which lowers the prices to significantly hurt Russia and Iran. And then you have China which is the main consumer of Venezuelan oil so you get another point of leverage. Also probably helps to ensure the petro dollar is here to stay for longer. Obviously this is a very shallow analysis, and there's definitely significant risks, but I do think it's obvious that it has large potential upsides.
    - estearum 10mo ago
      Well... POTUS just said that the plan is to sell large amounts of Venezuelan oil to China and Russia. So again: conceivably sure, but the details matter. The details we have right now do not look very promising IMO.
    - jacquesm 10mo ago
      It's not shallow, it is gullible. Of course Trump has an angle otherwise he wouldn't have done this. We can speculate about what the angle is but there is absolutely no way that he did this for the good of the Venezuelan population. Edit: So, that took only 8 minutes, the other shoe just dropped, it was about the oil after all. Where do I collect my check?
      - mupuff1234 10mo ago
        Oh yeah, I'm certain the intent behind this wasn't for the sake of the Venezuelan population, but that in itself doesn't mean it won't result in a better outcome for the population (but also not saying that it will)
        stickfigure 10mo ago
        The thing I occasionally say about Trump is: "Even a stopped clock is right twice a day." We ("the opposition") can't get into the frame where we say that everything Trump does is wrong. It's not frequent, but sometimes - yes even for totally wrong reasons - he does things which are probably right. Our identity needs to be more than just "the opposite of what Trump does", otherwise the Trumpists will frame all debates around issues that make us look crazy, rather than the issues that demonstrate blatant grift and criminality. If Maduro is gone, it's a good thing. Let's go back to talking about the clear and obviously terrible things Trump does. Don't let them change the subject.
- JKCalhoun 10mo ago
  "…it being a strong ally to Russia, Iran and China…" You're making a pretty good case for high risk.
  - mupuff1234 10mo ago
    You could easily say the same thing about not doing anything. But also remember that Russia is occupied in Ukraine and couldn't even help the Assad regime which was a much closer ally, and same with Iran.
    - cloverich 10mo ago
      i think the argument is Venezuela can help - or hurt - Russia.
      - NicoJuicy 10mo ago
        This is all about China, not Russia
- ElectricalUnion 10mo ago
  > strong ally to Russia, Iran and China It's more like (similar to other sanctioned countries) "forcibly coerced by the USA into being a ally of Russia, Iran and China by sanctions".
JKCalhoun 10mo ago
Agree. If I wear a blindfold, cross a highway and am not hit by a car, am I willing to concede that crossing the highway blindfolded is safe?
singpolyma3 10mo ago
Since the purpose of the interventions is to get more access for US oil companies, they are always successes

jacquesm 10mo ago

Ethics debates are not served by utilitarian arguments.

andsoitis 10mo ago
> Ethics debates are not served by utilitarian arguments. There isn't just a single universally agreed upon moral framework that serves as the basis for ethics. Depending on whether you adopt a Rawlsian, Utilitarian, Libertarian, or Communitarian moral framework, your actions would look different depending on the circumstances. Specially, the Utilitarian moral framework optimizes for the greatest good for the greatest number. Willing to sacrifice the few of the many. It might not be your or my moral framework, but I don't know that we can rule it out as a valid way to approach ethics.
- jacquesm 10mo ago
  > Specially, the Utilitarian moral framework optimizes for the greatest good for the greatest number. No, the proponents of the utilitarian moral framework try to justify illegal actions retrospectively if the outcome was good and refuse to take responsibility if it is bad. Ethics should guide your decisions beforehand and require you to take responsibility for all possible outcomes.
  - andsoitis 10mo ago
    Not sure I follow your line of thinking. Are you arguing that Utilitarianism isn't a way to guide decisions? And are you saying it is an invalid moral framework? FWIW, many ethicists suggest using multiple frameworks and would argue using Utilitarianism for policy. For example, in the EU utilitarianism is rarely used as the sole moral foundation but serves as the primary tool for practical decision-making and public policy. Most visible in how the EU balances competing interests to achieve the "greatest good".
    - card_zero 10mo ago
      There's a lot of unprincipled ethicists around.

Hikikomori 10mo ago

Ah so US will allow Venezuela to profit from their own oil? This time surely

jacquesm 10mo ago
I can't wait for the Total Energies or Shell Oil announcement.
- Hikikomori 10mo ago
  With investments from Kushners Saudi fund.
  - JKCalhoun 10mo ago
    You know there are boardroom meetings going on right now…
    - jacquesm 10mo ago
      100% on the money this comment. This is all about the spoils and absolutely not about the people or the drugs. Thinking about this some more: good chance this whole thing was decided in a board room a while ago.
qcnguy 10mo ago
Yes it will. Iraqi government budget is ~88% funded by oil revenues.
- amanaplanacanal 10mo ago
  I'm not sure using examples from the bush administration are necessarily relevant to the actions of the trump administration.

catlifeonmars 10mo ago

> Iraq was never a democracy. It bounced from monarchy to military rule to one party rule to Hussein's personal dictatorship. In reference to this, have you seen the footage of Saddam Hussein taking power? It’s chilling.