5 ms·

150 aircraft is not an invasion?

by hnburnsy 10mo ago

deleted 10mo ago
[deleted]
nerdsniper 10mo ago
Number of aircraft don’t seem to contribute to whether or not it’s classified as “hostilities”, much less “invasion”. Is this ridiculous ? Certainly. But it’s fairly par for the course in terms of politically complex issues in the USA. The War Powers Resolution (WPR) of 1973 sets a 60-day limit for U.S. forces in hostilities without a formal declaration of war or congressional authorization, allowing for a potential 30-day extension for withdrawal, totaling 90 days, after which the President must remove troops. Airstrikes on Libya (2011): Obama administration argued they did not need Congressional authorization because the operations did not constitute "hostilities" as defined by the War Powers Resolution. Therefore, the Obama administration argued, the 60-day clock never started. The bombings involved 26,500 sorties over eight months, including 7,000 bombing sorties targeting Gaddafi's forces.
SideburnsOfDoom 10mo ago
It depends on what you do with the aircraft. Also, on-the-day commentary about "regime change" was very much premature. A "regime" is not a single person, it is a ruling group, a system (1). The existing regime in Venezuela is still very much in place. It is undergoing change for sure, even having a crisis (2). But as this implies, it has not yet been swapped out for something else. 1) https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/regime https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/regime 2) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/07/caracas-venezuela-paramilitary-groups https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/07/caracas-venezu...
- tastyface 10mo ago
  So... Maduro was captured solely for his *personal* crimes? If not, then why was he captured?
  - SideburnsOfDoom 10mo ago
    I don't follow. What are you trying to say? Your question is not relevant to the proposition that the existing regime in Venezuela is still very much in place. I don't know how to say this more clearly than "a regime is not a person (source, the dictionary)".
    - tastyface 10mo ago
      "Was this attempted regime change?" and "Was the regime change successful?" are two different questions. Given the facts, it's hard to deny that the purpose of this operation was explicitly regime change.
      - SideburnsOfDoom 10mo ago
        > "Was this attempted regime change?" and "Was the regime change successful?" are two different questions. What I said was "on-the-day commentary about "regime change" was very much premature". My apologies, for the avoidance of any doubt I should have said "on-the-day commentary about "regime change" having already occurred successfully was very much premature". Does "The existing regime in Venezuela is still very much in place" not emphasise that meaning? Is that clearer to you? I didn't think it needed to be added, but people can be creative with misreadings. This seems like a issue at your end.
watwut 10mo ago
Dictionary defition is "when an army or country uses force to enter and take control of another country". They went in and out. They used force to enter, but they did not took control of another country. The government and regime is basically intact, maybe with some bruised ego assuming existing players did not tacitly allowed this to happen to promote themselves. Functionally, the situation is very similar to the situation from before the event, except there was some display of force and it was made clear someone inside is cooperating with usa.
- ribosometronome 10mo ago
  https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-vows-us-in-charge-venezuela-he-reveals-hes-spoken-delcy-rodriguez https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-vows-us-in-charge-ven... >"Don’t ask me who’s in charge because I’ll give you an answer, and it’ll be very controversial," Trump told a reporter. >He was then asked to clarify, to which Trump replied, "It means we’re in charge." Whether or not he's right, the US President's words seem to reveal an intent for the actions to result in the US being in control of Venezuela.
  - notahacker 10mo ago
    Or it means Trump saying what Trump always says, whilst also being extremely clear that he's negotiating with Venezuela's VP, who is busy asserting equally implausibly that Maduro is the country's only president to her own audience of people that believe whatever the government says.
  - wat10000 10mo ago
    And yet they're directly contrary to what actually happened. We're not actually in charge and haven't made any visible attempt to take charge. It might happen, if Trump doesn't get distracted by a shiny object first, but it hasn't yet.
    - anon84873628 10mo ago
      What Trump means is that he has kicked the Venezuela government in the balls in order to coerce them. Trump is a mob boss. He considers himself "in charge" of them now because he has clearly dominated them, expects them to comply with his future demands, and will continue to use force against them in the future if they don't do what he wants.
terminalshort 10mo ago
The bombing of Dresden involved thousands of aircraft and it was not an invasion.
- jjk166 10mo ago
  It was part of an ongoing invasion.

150 aircraft is not an invasion?

deleted 10mo ago

[deleted]

Number of aircraft don’t seem to contribute to whether or not it’s classified as “hostilities”, much less “invasion”. Is this ridiculous ? Certainly. But it’s fairly par for the course in terms of politically complex issues in the USA. The War Powers Resolution (WPR) of 1973 sets a 60-day limit for U.S. forces in hostilities without a formal declaration of war or congressional authorization, allowing for a potential 30-day extension for withdrawal, totaling 90 days, after which the President must remove troops. Airstrikes on Libya (2011): Obama administration argued they did not need Congressional authorization because the operations did not constitute "hostilities" as defined by the War Powers Resolution. Therefore, the Obama administration argued, the 60-day clock never started. The bombings involved 26,500 sorties over eight months, including 7,000 bombing sorties targeting Gaddafi's forces.

SideburnsOfDoom 10mo ago

It depends on what you do with the aircraft. Also, on-the-day commentary about "regime change" was very much premature. A "regime" is not a single person, it is a ruling group, a system (1). The existing regime in Venezuela is still very much in place. It is undergoing change for sure, even having a crisis (2). But as this implies, it has not yet been swapped out for something else. 1) https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/regime https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/regime 2) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/07/caracas-venezuela-paramilitary-groups https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/07/caracas-venezu...

tastyface 10mo ago
So... Maduro was captured solely for his *personal* crimes? If not, then why was he captured?
- SideburnsOfDoom 10mo ago
  I don't follow. What are you trying to say? Your question is not relevant to the proposition that the existing regime in Venezuela is still very much in place. I don't know how to say this more clearly than "a regime is not a person (source, the dictionary)".
  - tastyface 10mo ago
    "Was this attempted regime change?" and "Was the regime change successful?" are two different questions. Given the facts, it's hard to deny that the purpose of this operation was explicitly regime change.
    - SideburnsOfDoom 10mo ago
      > "Was this attempted regime change?" and "Was the regime change successful?" are two different questions. What I said was "on-the-day commentary about "regime change" was very much premature". My apologies, for the avoidance of any doubt I should have said "on-the-day commentary about "regime change" having already occurred successfully was very much premature". Does "The existing regime in Venezuela is still very much in place" not emphasise that meaning? Is that clearer to you? I didn't think it needed to be added, but people can be creative with misreadings. This seems like a issue at your end.

watwut 10mo ago

Dictionary defition is "when an army or country uses force to enter and take control of another country". They went in and out. They used force to enter, but they did not took control of another country. The government and regime is basically intact, maybe with some bruised ego assuming existing players did not tacitly allowed this to happen to promote themselves. Functionally, the situation is very similar to the situation from before the event, except there was some display of force and it was made clear someone inside is cooperating with usa.

ribosometronome 10mo ago
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-vows-us-in-charge-venezuela-he-reveals-hes-spoken-delcy-rodriguez https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-vows-us-in-charge-ven... >"Don’t ask me who’s in charge because I’ll give you an answer, and it’ll be very controversial," Trump told a reporter. >He was then asked to clarify, to which Trump replied, "It means we’re in charge." Whether or not he's right, the US President's words seem to reveal an intent for the actions to result in the US being in control of Venezuela.
- notahacker 10mo ago
  Or it means Trump saying what Trump always says, whilst also being extremely clear that he's negotiating with Venezuela's VP, who is busy asserting equally implausibly that Maduro is the country's only president to her own audience of people that believe whatever the government says.
- wat10000 10mo ago
  And yet they're directly contrary to what actually happened. We're not actually in charge and haven't made any visible attempt to take charge. It might happen, if Trump doesn't get distracted by a shiny object first, but it hasn't yet.
  - anon84873628 10mo ago
    What Trump means is that he has kicked the Venezuela government in the balls in order to coerce them. Trump is a mob boss. He considers himself "in charge" of them now because he has clearly dominated them, expects them to comply with his future demands, and will continue to use force against them in the future if they don't do what he wants.

terminalshort 10mo ago

The bombing of Dresden involved thousands of aircraft and it was not an invasion.

jjk166 10mo ago
It was part of an ongoing invasion.