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

[Jimmy Higgins]

Will our oil companies take an expensive risk like this? Especially knowing how volatile Trump himself is? And the fact that he's got, at the most, three years left on the scene? He'll be gone long before some huge infrastructure project would happen. Not to mention that each Big Mac could be his last.

Despite political risks, I think the oil market will need Venezuelan oil in the future. US is extracting oil at >10Mbbl/d and that can't last at this rate too much longer. I see US shale declining sharply past 2030 or so. Major Saudi oil fields have been producing for >60 years by now, and it is also questionable how much Saudi Arabia will be able to produce past 2030. While oil demand will certainly decline some due to EVs and other technological advances, we will still need oil. And it will increasingly be difficult oil like Canadian oil sands (Athabasca) , Venezuelan oil sands (Orinoco) and similar that will have to be tapped to meet the demand.

That didn't answer the question. What oil company is going to risk billions on a Donald Trump whim? We are one mid-term election from Venezuela not being a thing without actual honest collaboration with the nation.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Will our oil companies take an expensive risk like this? Especially knowing how volatile Trump himself is? And the fact that he's got, at the most, three years left on the scene? He'll be gone long before some huge infrastructure project would happen. Not to mention that each Big Mac could be his last.

Despite political risks, I think the oil market will need Venezuelan oil in the future. US is extracting oil at >10Mbbl/d and that can't last at this rate too much longer. I see US shale declining sharply past 2030 or so. Major Saudi oil fields have been producing for >60 years by now, and it is also questionable how much Saudi Arabia will be able to produce past 2030. While oil demand will certainly decline some due to EVs and other technological advances, we will still need oil. And it will increasingly be difficult oil like Canadian oil sands (Athabasca) , Venezuelan oil sands (Orinoco) and similar that will have to be tapped to meet the demand.

That didn't answer the question. What oil company is going to risk billions on a Donald Trump whim? We are one mid-term election from Venezuela not being a thing without actual honest collaboration with the nation.

Does it matter if we keep seizing the oil tankers and bringing the oil to American oil oligarchs for cash money? I mean, they're not risking much to simply buy the oil from Trump. He does whatever he wants and the Supremes will support him.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

US seizes two 'ghost fleet' tankers linked to Venezuelan oil

The ships were boarded by US forces in predawn operations in the North Atlantic and the Caribbean Sea.

www.bbc.com

I'm a little confused on why we are still executing a siege war. The new President is already threatened. How are they supposed to get the economy back on track if pirates keep stealing their oil?

 

[Shadowy Man]

US seizes two 'ghost fleet' tankers linked to Venezuelan oil

The ships were boarded by US forces in predawn operations in the North Atlantic and the Caribbean Sea.

www.bbc.com

I'm a little confused on why we are still executing a siege war. The new President is already threatened. How are they supposed to get the economy back on track if pirates keep stealing their oil?

Is "getting the economy back on track" a goal of Trump's? It certainly doesn't seem so for the US, why would he do so for Venezuela?

 

[barbos]

Jeffrey Sachs on the topic.

 

[DrZoidberg]

US seizes two 'ghost fleet' tankers linked to Venezuelan oil

The ships were boarded by US forces in predawn operations in the North Atlantic and the Caribbean Sea.

www.bbc.com

I'm a little confused on why we are still executing a siege war. The new President is already threatened. How are they supposed to get the economy back on track if pirates keep stealing their oil?

Don't you think it's just power play? Trump waving around his tiny penis, just to prove that USA is untouchable, above having to care about what anyone else thinks and are unstopable?

And to elaborate on this. Since WW2 Europe has dismantled their armies and let USA act world police. A very expensive job. While Europe has used that money for generous welfare programs and socialised healthcare. This has been one of Trump's (very valid criticisms) of Europe. When Trump witheld weapons to Ukraine Europe was slow to fill the gap. As if we expect USA to keep doing our dirty work for us. Europe still isn't matching USA when it comes to arms to Ukraine. Only the Baltic states and Poland are doing that. I suspect this is a very ham fisted way by Trump to demonstrate to Europe how important it is to have a strong army. This along with Trump's threats on taking Greenland by force, are all signals to Europe that unless we rearm and are willing to do our share for world peace, USA will stop doing it. Granted, that's a very generous interpretation of Trump. Another interpretation is that Trump is Putin's, dumber, evil twin. Which is also a possibility.


Anyway... all speculation

 

[TV and credit cards]

US seizes two 'ghost fleet' tankers linked to Venezuelan oil

The ships were boarded by US forces in predawn operations in the North Atlantic and the Caribbean Sea.

www.bbc.com

I'm a little confused on why we are still executing a siege war. The new President is already threatened. How are they supposed to get the economy back on track if pirates keep stealing their oil?

Don't you think it's just power play? Trump waving around his tiny penis, just to prove that USA is untouchable, above having to care about what anyone else thinks and are unstopable?

And to elaborate on this. Since WW2 Europe has dismantled their armies and let USA act world police. A very expensive job. While Europe has used that money for generous welfare programs and socialised healthcare. This has been one of Trump's (very valid criticisms) of Europe. When Trump witheld weapons to Ukraine Europe was slow to fill the gap. As if we expect USA to keep doing our dirty work for us. Europe still isn't matching USA when it comes to arms to Ukraine. Only the Baltic states and Poland are doing that. I suspect this is a very ham fisted way by Trump to demonstrate to Europe how important it is to have a strong army. This along with Trump's threats on taking Greenland by force, are all signals to Europe that unless we rearm and are willing to do our share for world peace, USA will stop doing it. Granted, that's a very generous interpretation of Trump. Another interpretation is that Trump is Putin's, dumber, evil twin. Which is also a possibility.


Anyway... all speculation

I largely agree with this. Trump is again doing exactly what he said he would do with his Trump Corollary, that is to removed adversaries from influence in the western hemisphere and control it's vital assets.
But I do not get the connection to Russia on this, that Trump may be purposefully acting on Russia's behalf. Russia is China's access to the Arctic and this is by and large who Trump is trying to remove from the US sphere of influence. I think Trump doing any of this to benefit Russia is rabbit hole thinking.
I think Trump will press hard for total control of Greenland but in the end settle for Greenland controlling its resources in name only. US firms want access to these resources and they paid Trump for this access, this is why Denmark and Greenland allowing unfettered military access is not enough.
My only speculation with regards to Russia is Trump would rather try and peel Russia away from Chinese influence rather than take them both on head to head.

 

[DrZoidberg]

US seizes two 'ghost fleet' tankers linked to Venezuelan oil

The ships were boarded by US forces in predawn operations in the North Atlantic and the Caribbean Sea.

www.bbc.com

I'm a little confused on why we are still executing a siege war. The new President is already threatened. How are they supposed to get the economy back on track if pirates keep stealing their oil?

Don't you think it's just power play? Trump waving around his tiny penis, just to prove that USA is untouchable, above having to care about what anyone else thinks and are unstopable?

And to elaborate on this. Since WW2 Europe has dismantled their armies and let USA act world police. A very expensive job. While Europe has used that money for generous welfare programs and socialised healthcare. This has been one of Trump's (very valid criticisms) of Europe. When Trump witheld weapons to Ukraine Europe was slow to fill the gap. As if we expect USA to keep doing our dirty work for us. Europe still isn't matching USA when it comes to arms to Ukraine. Only the Baltic states and Poland are doing that. I suspect this is a very ham fisted way by Trump to demonstrate to Europe how important it is to have a strong army. This along with Trump's threats on taking Greenland by force, are all signals to Europe that unless we rearm and are willing to do our share for world peace, USA will stop doing it. Granted, that's a very generous interpretation of Trump. Another interpretation is that Trump is Putin's, dumber, evil twin. Which is also a possibility.


Anyway... all speculation

I largely agree with this. Trump is again doing exactly what he said he would do with his Trump Corollary, that is to removed adversaries from influence in the western hemisphere and control it's vital assets.
But I do not get the connection to Russia on this, that Trump may be purposefully acting on Russia's behalf. Russia is China's access to the Arctic and this is by and large who Trump is trying to remove from the US sphere of influence. I think Trump doing any of this to benefit Russia is rabbit hole thinking.

Yeah. Conspiracy theory nonsense. The only thing pro Russian about Trump, is that I think Trump aproves of Putin's methods. Trump seems to think that the strong has a right to dominate their neighbours. That's what he's implied anyway. But I think Trump is still on team USA against Russia. He still wants Russia stopped. But for different reasons than Biden. I still think Trump is the first US president of a new age of Imperialism. Trump is only willing to stop Russia if there's something in it for USA. He wants every penny USA spends to be an investement. Not a sacrifice for the good of world peace. Trump clearly doesn't care about world peace. He cares about power and dominance.

I think Trump will press hard for total control of Greenland but in the end settle for Greenland controlling its resources in name only. US firms want access to these resources and they paid Trump for this access, this is why Denmark and Greenland allowing unfettered military access is not enough.
My only speculation with regards to Russia is Trump would rather try and peel Russia away from Chinese influence rather than take them both on head to head.

I think Trump will press hard for control of Greenland because the European powers have proven to be weak and pathetic. I don't think European countries have the balls to stand up for ourselves or push back. All we do is whine about legal rights and which minority is the most victimised, while crippling our industry with CO2 targets that our main adversaries couldn't give less of a hoot about. Europeans seem utterly oblivious what we're up against, or how dangerous the world is. We've made ourselves completely dependent on the protection of USA and that they'll always be on our side. It's naive, dangerous and stupid. We put our balls in the hands of Trump and are somehow (and for no reason) trusting he won't grab them. Well, why wouldn't he? This is how Europe behaved in the age of imperialism. It's not like any European power isn't neck deep in historical guilt. It's bizarre that we don't look back at our own history and ponder a bit about how we behaved when we had the kind of power USA had now. We behaved badly... as one would expect.

 

[SLD]

Will our oil companies take an expensive risk like this? Especially knowing how volatile Trump himself is? And the fact that he's got, at the most, three years left on the scene? He'll be gone long before some huge infrastructure project would happen. Not to mention that each Big Mac could be his last.

Despite political risks, I think the oil market will need Venezuelan oil in the future. US is extracting oil at >10Mbbl/d and that can't last at this rate too much longer. I see US shale declining sharply past 2030 or so. Major Saudi oil fields have been producing for >60 years by now, and it is also questionable how much Saudi Arabia will be able to produce past 2030. While oil demand will certainly decline some due to EVs and other technological advances, we will still need oil. And it will increasingly be difficult oil like Canadian oil sands (Athabasca) , Venezuelan oil sands (Orinoco) and similar that will have to be tapped to meet the demand.

That didn't answer the question. What oil company is going to risk billions on a Donald Trump whim? We are one mid-term election from Venezuela not being a thing without actual honest collaboration with the nation.

The idea that we’re going to tap into Venezuela’s oil reserves is nothing but a Trump fantasy.

The Emperor’s New Oil Wealth

The truth behind Trump’s black, sticky fantasy

paulkrugman.substack.com

Chavez loved to boast about his oil reserves. He even tripled them so that they would be the largest in the world. But most are not realistically recoverable. It’s heavy crude that is expensive to drill and refine. Chavez was just making shit up to attract foreign investment. Now he has a stupid moron trying to invest.

Furthermore they don’t have the infrastructure necessary due to decades of neglect. Add in the security risks and you quickly realize that the oil money just isn’t there. But of course that won’t stop Donny. Until the next squirrel distracts him.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I largely agree with this. Trump is again doing exactly what he said he would do with his Trump Corollary, that is to removed adversaries from influence in the western hemisphere and control it's vital assets.
But I do not get the connection to Russia on this, that Trump may be purposefully acting on Russia's behalf. Russia is China's access to the Arctic and this is by and large who Trump is trying to remove from the US sphere of influence. I think Trump doing any of this to benefit Russia is rabbit hole thinking.

Yeah. Conspiracy theory nonsense. The only thing pro Russian about Trump, is that I think Trump aproves of Putin's methods. Trump seems to think that the strong has a right to dominate their neighbours. That's what he's implied anyway. But I think Trump is still on team USA against Russia. He still wants Russia stopped. But for different reasons than Biden. I still think Trump is the first US president of a new age of Imperialism. Trump is only willing to stop Russia if there's something in it for USA. He wants every penny USA spends to be an investement.

This is a joke right? He doesn't give a damn about where US money goes. Trump doesn't understand investments, only grift.

Trump clearly doesn't care about world peace. He cares about power and dominance.

I don't believe Trump has the mental aptitude to have a plan like that. At best Trump is a man of action (or inaction), but no follow-through. He wants to be "the man" in the room without all that hard effort to actually fulfill that role.

I think Trump will press hard for control of Greenland because the European powers have proven to be weak and pathetic. I don't think European countries have the balls to stand up for ourselves or push back. All we do is whine about legal rights and which minority is the most victimised, while crippling our industry with CO2 targets that our main adversaries couldn't give less of a hoot about. Europeans seem utterly oblivious what we're up against, or how dangerous the world is. We've made ourselves completely dependent on the protection of USA and that they'll always be on our side. It's naive, dangerous and stupid. We put our balls in the hands of Trump and are somehow (and for no reason) trusting he won't grab them. Well, why wouldn't he? This is how Europe behaved in the age of imperialism. It's not like any European power isn't neck deep in historical guilt. It's bizarre that we don't look back at our own history and ponder a bit about how we behaved when we had the kind of power USA had now. We behaved badly... as one would expect.

This has got to be one of the oddest things I've read. Guilt? This isn't about guilt, there is the remembering of the an endless cycle of war that nearly destroyed the continent. So of course the nations are hesitant to go back to the days of a continental conflict every 30 to 40 or so years because one or two leaders has a 'great idea' about expansion.

Right now Trump is ignoring existing agreements including the one with Denmark that would allow the US to generally put a base anywhere on the island of Greenland it wants. Which implies that the motive behind the Greenland deal isn't something that'd benefit Europe in anyway.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

It seems like it is not so much a plan as it is a doctrine.

Outscooped By Trump: The Strike on Nigeria's Real Target Was Venezuela

Trump’s kidnapping of Maduro has taught me a lesson: that if you think you have a scoop, you file it immediately, not only to get the story out first but

www.counterpunch.org

NSS 2025 is an iconoclastic document. It literally dumps the 80-year-old strategy of liberal containment that guided the United States from the post-World War II years through the Cold War years to the post-Cold War years, which was to meet challenges to global capital wherever and whenever the U.S. state saw its interests threatened or challenged.

Next to its overthrowing the 80-year-old American “Grand Strategy,” the most significant departure in NSS 2025 is its break with the key assumption of U.S. security policy since the presidency of George W. Bush (2001-2008), including the first Trump administration (2017-2021): that Washington must focus its resources on containing China, which was defined as the principal U.S. strategic competitor.

Replacing China and the Asia Pacific as the main U.S. concern in the western hemisphere, the document comes out with a reiteration of the Monroe Doctrine, but one fortified with what it calls the “Trump corollary.” It states that Washington “will deny non-hemispheric competitors the ability to position forces or other threatening capabilities, or to own or control strategically vital assets, in our hemisphere.” There is no more stark expression of the rude replacement of the liberal containment doctrine by a “spheres of influence” approach

 

[DrZoidberg]

I think Trump will press hard for control of Greenland because the European powers have proven to be weak and pathetic. I don't think European countries have the balls to stand up for ourselves or push back. All we do is whine about legal rights and which minority is the most victimised, while crippling our industry with CO2 targets that our main adversaries couldn't give less of a hoot about. Europeans seem utterly oblivious what we're up against, or how dangerous the world is. We've made ourselves completely dependent on the protection of USA and that they'll always be on our side. It's naive, dangerous and stupid. We put our balls in the hands of Trump and are somehow (and for no reason) trusting he won't grab them. Well, why wouldn't he? This is how Europe behaved in the age of imperialism. It's not like any European power isn't neck deep in historical guilt. It's bizarre that we don't look back at our own history and ponder a bit about how we behaved when we had the kind of power USA had now. We behaved badly... as one would expect.

This has got to be one of the oddest things I've read. Guilt? This isn't about guilt, there is the remembering of the an endless cycle of war that nearly destroyed the continent. So of course the nations are hesitant to go back to the days of a continental conflict every 30 to 40 or so years because one or two leaders has a 'great idea' about expansion.

Right now Trump is ignoring existing agreements including the one with Denmark that would allow the US to generally put a base anywhere on the island of Greenland it wants. Which implies that the motive behind the Greenland deal isn't something that'd benefit Europe in anyway.

Shut up hippie. The age of aquarious is the dumbest thing anyone ever said. There's no universal enlightenment or raised vibration. Wake up out of your delusional slumber.

Here's another theory... humans will continue to behave like they always have... but now with more bigger and more advanced guns.

The cold war didn't stay cold because we suddenly became wise. The cold war stayed cold because of the atomic bomb. That's what has kept the peace since WW2. But now, for complicated reasons, that is no longer a deterent.

Trump is ignoring agreements because he can. Putin attacked Ukraine because he can. China isn't grabbing Taiwan right now, because they can't. This isn't complicated.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

^
The below also applies to Greenland, though we don't really need to discuss Greenland in this thread and Venezuela in the other thread.

It seems like it is not so much a plan as it is a doctrine.

Outscooped By Trump: The Strike on Nigeria's Real Target Was Venezuela

Trump’s kidnapping of Maduro has taught me a lesson: that if you think you have a scoop, you file it immediately, not only to get the story out first but

www.counterpunch.org

NSS 2025 is an iconoclastic document. It literally dumps the 80-year-old strategy of liberal containment that guided the United States from the post-World War II years through the Cold War years to the post-Cold War years, which was to meet challenges to global capital wherever and whenever the U.S. state saw its interests threatened or challenged.

Next to its overthrowing the 80-year-old American “Grand Strategy,” the most significant departure in NSS 2025 is its break with the key assumption of U.S. security policy since the presidency of George W. Bush (2001-2008), including the first Trump administration (2017-2021): that Washington must focus its resources on containing China, which was defined as the principal U.S. strategic competitor.

Replacing China and the Asia Pacific as the main U.S. concern in the western hemisphere, the document comes out with a reiteration of the Monroe Doctrine, but one fortified with what it calls the “Trump corollary.” It states that Washington “will deny non-hemispheric competitors the ability to position forces or other threatening capabilities, or to own or control strategically vital assets, in our hemisphere.” There is no more stark expression of the rude replacement of the liberal containment doctrine by a “spheres of influence” approach

 

[barbos]

Putin attacked Ukraine because he can.

Putin can attack a lot of places, yet he does not. How do you explain that?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I think Trump will press hard for control of Greenland because the European powers have proven to be weak and pathetic. I don't think European countries have the balls to stand up for ourselves or push back. All we do is whine about legal rights and which minority is the most victimised, while crippling our industry with CO2 targets that our main adversaries couldn't give less of a hoot about. Europeans seem utterly oblivious what we're up against, or how dangerous the world is. We've made ourselves completely dependent on the protection of USA and that they'll always be on our side. It's naive, dangerous and stupid. We put our balls in the hands of Trump and are somehow (and for no reason) trusting he won't grab them. Well, why wouldn't he? This is how Europe behaved in the age of imperialism. It's not like any European power isn't neck deep in historical guilt. It's bizarre that we don't look back at our own history and ponder a bit about how we behaved when we had the kind of power USA had now. We behaved badly... as one would expect.

This has got to be one of the oddest things I've read. Guilt? This isn't about guilt, there is the remembering of the an endless cycle of war that nearly destroyed the continent. So of course the nations are hesitant to go back to the days of a continental conflict every 30 to 40 or so years because one or two leaders has a 'great idea' about expansion.

Right now Trump is ignoring existing agreements including the one with Denmark that would allow the US to generally put a base anywhere on the island of Greenland it wants. Which implies that the motive behind the Greenland deal isn't something that'd benefit Europe in anyway.

Shut up hippie. The age of aquarious is the dumbest thing anyone ever said. There's no universal enlightenment or raised vibration. Wake up out of your delusional slumber.

Here's another theory... humans will continue to behave like they always have... but now with more bigger and more advanced guns.

Yes and no. There is typically a cycle that occurs, but two things happened in the 40s and 60s. Firstly, the Holocaust/WWII and invention of television. There was some level of awakening in the 1960s where people started to care about things. It'd be 1964 when people would start asking, is dying in car racing really acceptable anymore (it was a punchline in 1930 news reels)? Should rivers be burning (no, the Cuyahoga River wasn't the only one). The Civil Rights movement in the US. TV was why South Africa worked hard at keeping access of cameras from hose parts of South Africa.

The horrors of WWII and the advent of television changed perspective and it impacted what human beings were willing to accept as happening. So the cycle of global history paused and diverged. No, it didn't usher in utopia. It gave us the far from perfect United Nations as well as a broader sense of empathy. Trump, an idiot, knows little about history and has been convinced to push an absurd agenda of 19th century colonialism while driving a wedge between us and Europe, of whom we had had a blisteringly successful run of economic prosperity and relative peace time.

By whom? I have a guess. I'll give you a hint, it rhymes with Prussia. The only European nation in the west not to get on the money train that was the 20th Century.

The cold war didn't stay cold because we suddenly became wise. The cold war stayed cold because of the atomic bomb. That's what has kept the peace since WW2. But now, for complicated reasons, that is no longer a deterent.

I disagree. The UN as well as a direct line of communication between DC and Moscow kept the Cold War from becoming WWIII. The UN which was developed to keep the big problems from engulfing the planet and communication helped prevent the unthinkable of global powers outdoing the harm of WWII. It didn't solve most of the problems that exist with being a massive civilization, it can't.

Trump is ignoring agreements because he can.

The agreement says he can build a base on Greenland! Why would he ignore that?!

He is ignoring it likely because of why he wants control of Greenland.

 

[SLD]

Putin attacked Ukraine because he can.

Putin can attack a lot of places, yet he does not. How do you you explain that?

Because he can’t. He can’t even attack Ukraine very well. Four years and you still haven’t conquered shit.

 

[barbos]

Putin attacked Ukraine because he can.

Putin can attack a lot of places, yet he does not. How do you you explain that?

Because he can’t. He can’t even attack Ukraine very well. Four years and you still haven’t conquered shit.

You people need to to agree on your theory.
And surely he can attack Georgia for example.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Putin attacked Ukraine because he can.

Putin can attack a lot of places, yet he does not. How do you explain that?

Generally "those places" have puppet regimes installed. Putin didn't need to invade Ukraine as long as his puppet was in charge of it.

 

[bilby]

Since forever we have had good kings and bad kings. We took power off kings, and gave it to prime ministers and presidents and first secretarries of The Party, in an effort to skew the balance more towards good "kings" than bad ones; But at the end of the day, those who wield power either wield it for good, or for bad, reasons.

Bad kings use power to amass more power and wealth, by riding roughshod over the less powerful.

Good kings use power to prevent bad kings from using theirs. They use it to protect the powerless from being robbed blind by the powerful. (The strength of democracy is that power is distributed, making it more difficult for a single powerful person to call all the shots).

This works at every level, from the family to the confederation of nation states. What we call "freedom" is the structure in which a powerful leadership protects us from powerful criminals who would otherwise parasitise any efforts we might make to improve our lives.

The US used to stand for freedom. Now Trump wants it to stand for imperialism and power - to make it from a good king into a bad king.

Bad kings are always popular with the patriotic masses, at least to begin with. Everyone likes to cheer when their team is winning. But you can't eat victory and glory. In the long run, people would rather skip the glory, and have food on the table.

And to put food on the table, you need freedom. For which you need good kings.

The reason the late C20th was prosperous and peaceful was that there was a superpower that had leaders whose priority was promoting freedom - ie the preventing of others from wielding power; And it was "first amongst equals" in a broad alliance of wealthy nations, all checking the power of the rest.

If that superpower's priority changes to the unilateral wielding of power, the world is fucked.

Or perhaps that should read "Now that that superpower's priority has changed to the unilateral wielding of power, the world is fucked".

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So "indefinite control" of Venezuelan oil.

Speaking at a Goldman Sachs energy industry event in Miami, Wright said the United States will allow Venezuelan oil under U.S. sanctions to flow again, but only to U.S. refineries. He said the sales will be “done by the U.S. government and deposited into accounts controlled by the U.S. government.”

“From there, those funds can flow back into Venezuela to benefit the Venezuelan people,” Wright said. “We need to leverage and control those oil sales to drive the changes that must happen in Venezuela.”

And herein lies the issue. What changes? The despotic government of Venezuela remains nearly entirely unchanged and intact.

Also, if the control is "indefinite" aren't we concluding that we aren't expecting the changes we aren't talking about are going to happen?