Trump says he’s not ruling out military option against Venezuela

[GennGreymane]

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...nezuela-241553

President Donald Trump on Friday said he would not rule out the U.S. pursuing “a military option” against Venezuela, which has come under increased pressure for its human rights abuses.

Speaking to reporters after meeting with Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley, Trump said he has “many options” for Venezuela, “including a possible military operation, if necessary.”

The U.S. Treasury Department late last month targeted Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro with sanctions, accusing him of widespread abuses of the Venezuelan people.

Treasury announced the sanctions following the election of an assembly to rewrite the Latin American country’s constitution.

“By sanctioning Maduro, the United States makes clear our opposition to the policies of his regime and our support for the people of Venezuela who seek to return their country to a full and prosperous democracy,” Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said at the time.

[Daedius]

What happened to "America first" ? Thought Trump wanted to stop the US from being the "world's police".

[StayTuned]

Remember when people said Hillary is a war hawk?

[Garnier Fructis]

Thank your lucky stars that Trump has the attention span of a fruit fly.

[Skroe]

I have to say, for YEARS I've resented this question even being asked.

Asking of the _______ option (usually military option) is off the table by a reporter has the implicit presumption that it should be.

But the President of the United States, or hell anybody in a position that needs negotiating leverage about anything should NEVER take any option off the table. That's giving away something for nothing. That's broadcasting intentions. That's not how any kind of negotiation or agenda-setting works.

This question just needs to get shot to death and set on fire. Nothing should be off the table publicly, ever, even if it is not seriously considered privately. Strategic ambiguity is a powerful tool our weirdly voyeuristic society has no appreciation of.

No, we should not bomb Venezuela. But nobody should know we're not going to do that for sure except the President and his national security team. Everybody else, it should be a big question mark, just like every other case. Limiting options? Insanity.

[Taso]

Remember when people said Hillary is a war hawk?

Remember when obama said the samething?

[Kaleredar]

What happened to "America first" ? Thought Trump wanted to stop the US from being the "world's police".

But her emails

[StayTuned]

Remember when obama said the samething?

Remember when no president was ever different in regards to throwing nukes and causing worldwide disruptions?

[Deleted]

Dealing in absolutes (I will not do X) is not smart.
Hate Trump all you want, but remarking how everything is possible is the correct answer when no explicit plan is drafted.

[Kaleredar]

Dealing in absolutes (I will not do X) is not smart.
Hate Trump all you want, but remarking how everything is possible is the correct answer when no explicit plan is drafted.

"maybe we'll send in the military, maybe we'll unleash super mechagodzilla against them, ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE!" is not really a valid way to approach the situation.

You can either claim he's being militaristic by the merit of his words or is giving a non-answer, by your own logic.


Nothing befitting competence, at least.

[Theinquisition]

Why? keep it around as an example of how not to govern, and what socialism does to a country when it reaches it's crescendo.

[Deleted]

"maybe we'll send in the military, maybe we'll unleash super mechagodzilla against them, ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE!" is not really a valid way to approach the situation.

You can either claim he's being militaristic by the merit of his words or is giving a non-answer, by your own logic.


Nothing befitting competence, at least.

A non answer IS the competent answer and the way to go, yes.

[Utinil]

I don't understand why this is even a story. He says it is an option if necessary. Guess what, just about everything is an option if necessary. It doesn't sound like he is stating it is the first choice, or even a likely one.

[Deleted]

What happened to "America first" ? Thought Trump wanted to stop the US from being the "world's police".

What happened to Trump being a selfish a-hole who doesn't care about anyone else, just money and profit? Socialism is evil, the people in Venezuela are literally starving to death because of it.. doing something would just be humane.

[Pengekaer]

Why? keep it around as an example of how not to govern, and what socialism does to a country when it reaches it's crescendo.

Well-spoken. I agree.

[Nadiru]

I don't understand why this is even a story. He says it is an option if necessary. Guess what, just about everything is an option if necessary. It doesn't sound like he is stating it is the first choice, or even a likely one.

President Donald Trump on Friday said

There's your causal factor.

[Theinquisition]

Well-spoken. I agree.

Wasn't the response I was expecting on this forum, thanks bruh.

[Better]

Remember when no president was ever different in regards to throwing nukes and causing worldwide disruptions?

2 nukes have been used offensively ever. So no, no president has been "throwing nukes" since Truman.

[Deleted]

Trump is on a roll. Hope he runs the military into the ground with all his wars, so that China can take its rightful spot as number 1.

[Pengekaer]

I have to say, for YEARS I've resented this question even being asked.

Asking of the _______ option (usually military option) is off the table by a reporter has the implicit presumption that it should be.

But the President of the United States, or hell anybody in a position that needs negotiating leverage about anything should NEVER take any option off the table. That's giving away something for nothing. That's broadcasting intentions. That's not how any kind of negotiation or agenda-setting works.

This question just needs to get shot to death and set on fire. Nothing should be off the table publicly, ever, even if it is not seriously considered privately. Strategic ambiguity is a powerful tool our weirdly voyeuristic society has no appreciation of.

No, we should not bomb Venezuela. But nobody should know we're not going to do that for sure except the President and his national security team. Everybody else, it should be a big question mark, just like every other case. Limiting options? Insanity.

In a situation like North Korea or Russia, I would agree with you. But since Venezuela has not made any attempt to attack or the US or its interests, and isnt exactly threatening to scud the White House, is it too much to demand transperancy whether the US wants a war or not?
Against aggressive and hostile countries, no problem, conceal the intentions. But against Venezuela? Seriously, no.

- - - Updated - - -

Wasn't the response I was expecting on this forum, thanks bruh.

Yeah, if we loose Venezuela, we will have to stick with France ;/