Intervention != Invasion... and there is no denying the US has been and continues to intervene in Venezuela's affairs (for good or ill): https://www.state.gov/e/eb/tfs/spi/venezuela/...
Intervention != Invasion... and there is no denying the US has been and continues to intervene in Venezuela's affairs (for good or ill):
Re: intervention in Vzla, the author in OP acts like it's something new that's discrediting the US when, as you correctly pointed out, it's not new, and the most recent stuff (like redirecting...
Re: intervention in Vzla, the author in OP acts like it's something new that's discrediting the US when, as you correctly pointed out, it's not new, and the most recent stuff (like redirecting bank accounts to Guaido's control) have been done with vast international support. For one, it was the Bank of England that notoriously denied Maduro the keys to the kingdom, and there's only a handful of countries in the American continent as a whole who back Maduro, a couple in Europe who haven't made up their mind (like Italy), but almost everyone in the Western hemisphere backs Guaido. Heck, even China isn't 100% on Maduro:
"China is an increasingly influential investor in Venezuela, taking 240,000 barrels of oil a day from the country, much of it designated as debt repayment. While China’s support is important for Mr. Maduro’s ability to remain in power, it has been conspicuously low-key regarding his struggle with Mr. Guaidó. When asked about China’s policy regarding Venezuela, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, Geng Shuang, said “China is committed to the principle of noninterference in other countries’ internal affairs.”
The relative neutrality of China, at least compared with Russia, may reflect China’s concern that it needs to remain open to all possibilities in Venezuela. If Mr. Guaidó were to prevail, China would need to cultivate a relationship with him that preserves its economic interests." ( https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/04/world/americas/venezuela-support-maduro-guaido.html )
So I think it's inclusion as evidence is silly at best.
Oh, absolutely! Please don't get me wrong, I do not agree with this author at all. Even the main premise of this article, that the US dollar is as good as abandoned, is patently not true IMO (at...
Oh, absolutely! Please don't get me wrong, I do not agree with this author at all. Even the main premise of this article, that the US dollar is as good as abandoned, is patently not true IMO (at least not yet anyways).
I was simply pointing out that OP might have the wrong impression about what intervention entails, since the US (and as you correctly pointed out, many other nations) have been doing it for some years now in Venezuela. And even with that I am decidedly neutral, hence my "for good or ill", since until we see how everything shakes out with Maduro/Guaido, we won't really know for sure if the citizens of Venezuela will ultimately benefit or if things will only get worse for them as a result of all this.
Is this written in an alternative timeline where the US invaded Venezuela, but hasn't yet imposed tariffs on China?
Intervention != Invasion... and there is no denying the US has been and continues to intervene in Venezuela's affairs (for good or ill):
https://www.state.gov/e/eb/tfs/spi/venezuela/
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-29/u-s-asserts-guaido-s-control-over-u-s-based-venezuela-accounts
But yes, it is a bit weird the author used "potential trade war" when it's pretty clear to everyone at this point that a full blown trade war is already in full swing.
Re: intervention in Vzla, the author in OP acts like it's something new that's discrediting the US when, as you correctly pointed out, it's not new, and the most recent stuff (like redirecting bank accounts to Guaido's control) have been done with vast international support. For one, it was the Bank of England that notoriously denied Maduro the keys to the kingdom, and there's only a handful of countries in the American continent as a whole who back Maduro, a couple in Europe who haven't made up their mind (like Italy), but almost everyone in the Western hemisphere backs Guaido. Heck, even China isn't 100% on Maduro:
"China is an increasingly influential investor in Venezuela, taking 240,000 barrels of oil a day from the country, much of it designated as debt repayment. While China’s support is important for Mr. Maduro’s ability to remain in power, it has been conspicuously low-key regarding his struggle with Mr. Guaidó. When asked about China’s policy regarding Venezuela, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, Geng Shuang, said “China is committed to the principle of noninterference in other countries’ internal affairs.”
The relative neutrality of China, at least compared with Russia, may reflect China’s concern that it needs to remain open to all possibilities in Venezuela. If Mr. Guaidó were to prevail, China would need to cultivate a relationship with him that preserves its economic interests." ( https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/04/world/americas/venezuela-support-maduro-guaido.html )
So I think it's inclusion as evidence is silly at best.
Oh, absolutely! Please don't get me wrong, I do not agree with this author at all. Even the main premise of this article, that the US dollar is as good as abandoned, is patently not true IMO (at least not yet anyways).
I was simply pointing out that OP might have the wrong impression about what intervention entails, since the US (and as you correctly pointed out, many other nations) have been doing it for some years now in Venezuela. And even with that I am decidedly neutral, hence my "for good or ill", since until we see how everything shakes out with Maduro/Guaido, we won't really know for sure if the citizens of Venezuela will ultimately benefit or if things will only get worse for them as a result of all this.
Ahh, I gotcha now! Thanks for clarifying!