How should west respond to potential (likely) U.S. invasion of Venezuela?

[TV and credit cards]

I did not know Maria Corina Machado supports Trump's boat strikes.
Scrapping away my disdain for Trump, it is understandable that the US government, Venezuelans and Venezuela's neighbors want Maduro gone. Yes, the Trump administration put out a simple explanation for our involvement in Venezuela's affairs: Drugs. Drugs bad. But this is about the store of natural wealth within Venezuela, not just oil but gold and other minerals but mostly oil and what a Maduro regime would do with this wealth and how it might affect the western hemisphere. Consider an America hating pro-Iran, pro-China, pro-Cuba oil rich nation not halfway around the world. Should we get involved in this nation's affairs? To say any change in government in Venezuela should happen organically is wishful thinking. Two thirds of Venezuela's population opposed Maduro in the last election. Millions of Venezuelans have fled to neighboring countries. These countries have received little support from wealthy nations in assisting these displaced people. Maduro has disappeared thousands since the last election. The Maduro government is thoroughly corrupt: the upper ranks on the decentralized military, the intelligence service, drug trafficking guerilla groups and pro Maduro paramilitary forces (colectivos) all work to keep Maduro in power. They have all the guns. So even with Maduro's overthrow, it is farfetched to think a pro democracy government could take control. Not without some interim assistance, not financial assistance but physical enforcement, and therein lies the rub.
For now it's my understanding agentic AI is being employed within Venezuela to leverage discontent. Even this is tricky as checkpoints are set up and people's phones are opened to look for anything anti-government.
Aside from Machado's support, I think it is important to watch to what extent congressional Democrats are willing to cling to these highly questionable boat strikes. This will tell us how they view the larger picture.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

In a previous post, I used the term siege warfare. After reviewing recent events, this isn't just a metaphor—it is a literal description of the current strategy. We have moved from decades of economic sanctions along a spectrum to a full-scale siege. To me, this legitimizes the argument that we are already at war with Venezuela, regardless of what the White House claims.

Let's look at the facts on the ground (and water):

• De Facto Blockade: The President has deployed the US military—not law enforcement or the Coast Guard—to enforce a naval blockade. This effectively scares off all trade, including fishing and essential survival goods.
• Airspace Closure: The administration has shut down Venezuelan airspace. Like the naval blockade, this isolates the country and strangles commerce.
• Violent Interdiction: We are bombing boats and seizing tankers. The justification—saving lives from fentanyl—is a hoax. Venezuela is not a significant producer of fentanyl, and the cocaine supply is negligible in terms of "terrorism." These are excuses to justify attrition.
• Internal Destabilization: The President announced CIA covert measures are active inside Venezuela. This aligns with historical siege tactics: pressure from the outside, subversion from the inside.

The core mechanic of siege warfare is attrition over assault. The goal is not to defeat an army in the field, but to exhaust the enemy’s resources and political will until the "castle" (the state) collapses. Historically, sieges rarely involved fighting inside the castle walls; they were about stopping supply lines and crushing anything that tried to run the gates. That is exactly what we are seeing now.

The Danger to Democracy

We need to be honest about what is happening: this is a power grab cloaked in secrecy. Even if you believe Maduro should be removed, look at how it is being done.

By refusing to call this a "war," the President bypasses Congress. He avoids the need for a formal declaration, public debate, or the appropriation of funds that would create a paper trail. If this were a legitimate intervention, the administration would argue its case openly, with transparency regarding who gets the rights to the oil fields afterward.

Instead, we have a siege war managed by executive fiat. This isn't just about Venezuela; it's about whether we still function as a democracy with checks and balances, or if we simply allow the executive branch to wage private wars off the books.

 

[thebeave]

More information about the oil tanker seizure:

Satellite images suggest seized tanker 'deliberately' manipulated location data

An ABC News analysis of satellite imagery and tracking data shows the oil tanker seized by the United States off the coast of Venezuela on Wednesday may have manipulated its location data -- an apparent attempt, experts said, to circumvent restrictions imposed by sanctions.

The crude oil tanker, named the "The Skipper," according to four people familiar with the operation, was sanctioned by the U.S. in 2022.

Digital broadcast signals emitted from the vessel’s transponder and tracked by analytics company Kpler placed the Skipper near Guyana’s offshore between November and December. However, more than a dozen satellite images verified by ABC News confirmed Skipper was in fact operating in waters off the coast of Barcelona, Venezuela, around 550 miles away during this same period.