Unsurprisingly… Exxon Mobil give Trump a big fat “f*ck no” in the politest way they can.
I hear more of a ‘we’re open to making money but you must think we’re stupid if we’re gonna invest in this country again without legal guarantees that we won’t lose it all again’, which is the pragmatic stance to take.I don't hear a "f*ck no" there, I hear a "tear up the country more until we can do whatever we want there and they can't do anything about it".
Yes, I heard “not so fast”… but not a “no.”I hear more of a ‘we’re open to making money but you must think we’re stupid if we’re gonna invest in this country again without legal guarantees that we won’t lose it all again’, which is the pragmatic stance to take.
Yes, I heard “not so fast”… but not a “no.”
Of course, Trump will now pressure him and other CEOs to go and invest in Venezuela.
The best outcome would be rerun of Iraq not AfghanistanThey'll need boots on the ground for security to do it, just to get the insurance to cover their operations in the country.
Which has always been inevitable and why I called it a rerun of vietnam. The very best outcome possible for this plan would be a rerun of afghanistan.
Apart from some oil execs maybe making a few billion, there is no win for america in any possible scenario.
That ship sailed long ago. There is no section of venezuelan society that supports the US. They have spent over a decade sanctioning the country. Every family has seen suffering from a lack of medical supplies, food or losing jobs thanks to the oil sales embargos.The best outcome would be rerun of Iraq not Afghanistan
I dont think regular Venezuelans hate the US as much as you suggest. The amount of immigration from that country suggests the opposite.That ship sailed long ago. There is no section of venezuelan society that supports the US. They have spent over a decade sanctioning the country. Every family has seen suffering from a lack of medical supplies, food or losing jobs thanks to the oil sales embargos.
Boots on the ground means heading into a hostile natural environment (almost as hostile as vietnam), with a hostile populous that has armed militia in almost every community.
I dont think regular Venezuelans hate the US as much as you suggest. The amount of immigration from that country suggests the opposite.
In order to organise the resistance that the poster implied you really need ideoligcally motivated people in large numbers. Disliking the government is just not sufficient.There is a difference between disliking the US government and moving to the US in order to make money and send it to your family. And it doesn't suggest that they like the US nor does it suggest the opposite.
In order to organise the resistance that the poster implied you really need ideoligcally motivated people in large numbers. Disliking the government is just not sufficient.
Their current GDP per capita is the same as 80 years ago, their livelihoods will inevitably get elevated. They know it too. One of the main trends this last week has been Venezuelans making memes out of foreign opinions: how you can't eat oil, how it doesn't matter if the US leeches on their oil instead of China, Russia and Cuba.I feel like the Yanks are a bit naive if they think this would be as simple as letting the Oil CEOs walk in, commandeer Venezuela's gargantuan reserves, and essentially pillage the country for the US' benefit, while expecting the 30 odd million Venezuelans to simply stand down accept it, all the while not seeing their own livelihoods elevated. This will inevitably turn violent for them.
I gather you don't speak Spanish and haven't interacted much with Venezuelans.That ship sailed long ago. There is no section of venezuelan society that supports the US. They have spent over a decade sanctioning the country. Every family has seen suffering from a lack of medical supplies, food or losing jobs thanks to the oil sales embargos.
Boots on the ground means heading into a hostile natural environment (almost as hostile as vietnam), with a hostile populous that has armed militia in almost every community.
They simply don't. Not the vast majority of them.I dont think regular Venezuelans hate the US as much as you suggest. The amount of immigration from that country suggests the opposite.
Venezuela: The security situation in Venezuela remains fluid. As international flights have resumed, U.S. citizens in Venezuela should leave the country immediately. Before departure, U.S. citizens should take precautions and be aware of their surroundings. There are reports of groups of armed militias, known as colectivos, setting up roadblocks and searching vehicles for evidence of U.S. citizenship or support for the United States. Remain vigilant and exercise caution when traveling by road. Monitor airlines’ communications and websites for updated information.Venezuela has the highest Travel Advisory level – Level 4: Do Not Travel – due to severe risks to Americans, including wrongful detention, torture in detention, terrorism, kidnapping, arbitrary enforcement of local laws, crime, civil unrest, and poor health infrastructure. Enroll in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP) at http://step.state.gov to receive security updates. More at https://ve.usembassy.gov/security-alert-venezuela-january-10-2026-do-not-travel-to-venezuela-depart-immediately/
https://x.com/TravelGov/status/2010088968067371243/photo/1
Economically as well..if the business prosper and jobs stable nobody would care to bear arms and fight.Seeing their fellow citizens murdered would do the trick.
The cyberattack that plunged Venezuela’s capital into darkness this month demonstrated the Pentagon’s ability not just to turn off the lights, but also to allow them to be turned back on, according to U.S. officials briefed on the operation.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/15/us/politics/cyberattack-venezuela-military.htmlTurning off the power in Caracas and interfering with radar allowed U.S. military helicopters to move into the country undetected on their mission to capture Nicolás Maduro, the Venezuelan president who has now been brought to the United States to face drug charges.
Cyberattack in Venezuela Demonstrated Precision of U.S. Capabilities
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/15/us/politics/cyberattack-venezuela-military.html
Won't be surprised if there was not even a need to burn a 0dThe power of Day0's.
I heard some political prisoners were released?One commentator said that the new president’s crackdown is worse than anything Maduro did.
About 17 confirmed last time I checked, which of course means there's far more anxiety going around than relief. This is exactly the scenario that was reportedly the fundamental disagreement between Machado and Trump, she saw no basis for "some" being released (all or nothing, partly for justice but also because there's no objective/fair grounds to pick and choose).I heard some political prisoners were released?
Before the US military snatched Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro, earlier this month, Delcy Rodríguez and her powerful brother pledged to cooperate with the Trump administration once the strongman was gone, four sources involved at high levels with the discussions told the Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/22/delcy-rodriguez-capture-maduro-venezuelaBy December, one American who was involved told the Guardian that Delcy Rodríguez told the US government she was ready: “Delcy was communicating ‘Maduro needs to go.’
It hasn't really been reported prominently in the UK if I'm honest. This is the first I am hearing about it, and it is very good news.No comments on El Helicode getting closed down and turned into a cultural centre?
This has all been quite bizarre and unorthodox but, so far:
1) Political prisoners that didn't exist have been released
2) Free oil shipments for Cuba that weren't happening stopped happening
3) The inexistent main torture centre has been closed down
The snail-pace of change must be excruciating, but little by little Venezuelans are getting their country back
What happened to the concern over the pillaging of the Venezuelan's resources?The shipments to cuba stopping are bad news, we know it's common folk who'll get hurt by this.
What happened to the concern over the pillaging of the Venezuelan's resources?
Worst case they are getting nothing in return, before they were getting pretorian guards and military support for an oppressive regime. I know which trade I'd prefer.
It's easy for a non-Venezuelan to say that. The other side of that trade is beefing up the regime's military strength and dependability (you are not going to see Cuban soldiers siding with Venezuelans and turning on the regime).I'd rather have resources going to cuba than to those totally legit trump offshore accounts. The whole embargo is criminal.
I'm not celebrating. I said it's all quite bizarre and unorthodox, but there's tangible progress where before there was none.Delcy is as oppressive as maduro, I think you're celebrating prematurely.
It's easy for a non-Venezuelan to say that. The other side of that trade is beefing up the regime's military strength and dependability (you are not going to see Cuban soldiers siding with Venezuelans and turning on the regime).
Trump's bank account is a moot point in comparison.
I'm not celebrating. I said it's all quite bizarre and unorthodox, but there's tangible progress where before there was none.
Last time I went to Venezuela it was clear to me it wasn't worth going back there and putting up with that shit. That was over 20 years ago.
Edit: you know what's more criminal than an embargo? A Caribbean island with no fishermen. Anyone getting hold of a boat is long gone. A fish and boat conundrum => give a man a boat and he will skip the fishing as he heads for Florida, don't give him a boat and nobody gets any fish either. No feeding for a day there, let alone a lifetime.
We were talking about Venezuela's oil and what benefit Venezuelans derive from it.It's easy for a non-cuban to say that.
Whatever the relationship is between venezuela and cuba, it's absolutely meaningless when it comes to them being a threat for the US or any of the world's largest economies. They are not. Their regimes are not. And the attempt to separate them by the US will result in no improvement to the quality of life of their citizens.
So what the embargo does is cause unnecessary pain to ordinary citizens that have absolutely no say in how their country is run.
The embargo is not strategic, it's just a collective punishment because cuba refused to align with US interests. It's one of the longest running crimes by the US.
Don't confuse my post for any kind of sympathy for cuba's dictatorship. But there are plenty of those out there that we are not embargoing, so this is not a moral choice, it's not part of any strategy. It's cruelty for the sake of it.
I honestly don't know how to reply to that. The effects of the embargo have been studied for decades, it's very well documented how it affects pretty much every area of cuban economy and quality of life of cubans.
It violates the UN charter and international law. Every year the UN votes on this with the US voting against the condemnation alongside 3 or 4 puppets.
It's indefensible really, no idea why you feel the need to downplay it.
Whilst I think still embargoing Cuba is not the right move at this moment in time, how is it "against international law."
Are countries not allowed to decide who to do business with then? Are sanctions on Russia also against International law?
Have countries lost de-facto control over their own economic policy? This doesn't make sense to me.
Regardless of the spurious justification for it, USA has the right to choose who and what entities it does business with and whom it chooses not to engage with, just like every other country.
Just like India and China have been funding Russia's war machine through increased trade, USA can choose to not trade with a certain entity if it so desires.
Whilst I think still embargoing Cuba is not the right move at this moment in time, how is it "against international law."
Are countries not allowed to decide who to do business with then? Are sanctions on Russia also against International law?
Have countries lost de-facto control over their own economic policy? This doesn't make sense to me.
Regardless of the spurious justification for it, USA has the right to choose who and what entities it does business with and whom it chooses not to engage with, just like every other country.
Just like India and China have been funding Russia's war machine through increased trade, USA can choose to not trade with a certain entity if it so desires.
Of course having the world's largest economy next door and not trading with it is going to hurt massively.I honestly don't know how to reply to that. The effects of the embargo have been studied for decades, it's very well documented how it affects pretty much every area of cuban economy and quality of life of cubans.
It violates the UN charter and international law. Every year the UN votes on this with the US voting against the condemnation alongside 3 or 4 puppets.
It's indefensible really, no idea why you feel the need to downplay it.
Of course having the world's largest economy next door and not trading with it is going to hurt massively.
But, as I said, this was a 60+ year process. Cuba chose a path: the path of state enterprise and dependency on Soviet subsidies. When that fell on its arse, reality hit them until they had a renaissance... with Chaves' Venezuela bankrolling them. When sponsored, they were "bravely beating the embargo". When the sponsors withdrew, they were "victims of the embargo".
The fundamental problem is not the embargo but going down the rabbit hole of shunning capitalism and free markets and instead pinning expectations on "allies" which, in turn, make them focus their efforts and resources on all the wrong things. Venezuelans have a similar take on their so-called "allies", they see them as leeches which systematically misuse and misappropriate resources because they are on a political quest, over and above an economic one.
Cuba are just not competitive and that's largely their government's own doing, the cummulative effect of over 60 years of poor decision-making. As I mentioned -and I keep coming back to this because it's a fecking island- Cuba's fishing industry is producing less than 10% of what it produced in the 80s. Their (state) fleet is literally what's left of what they had back then. It's not the embargo that forced them to stop reinvesting, producing and exporting to the many countries that happily trade with them. No, it's the fact they were inefficient but the USSR papered over those cracks.
The entire system and operating logic is fundamentally flawed, with or without an embargo. Obviously starker with one, more so when you see how China managed to pull themselves out of a hole by embracing free-market dynamics. It would be fair to say Cuba didn't have that path on offer, sure, but nothing in their rhetoric or how they've gone about things indicates they would have done anything remotely similar. In fact, I'd argue the government there welcomes the embargo as a convenient excuse with a galvanising effect they happily indulge in leveraving.
