[stickfigure]

Iraq was never a democracy. It bounced from monarchy to military rule to one party rule to Hussein's personal dictatorship.

Venezuela had a... let's call it "respectable" democracy since the late 50s. Chavez did it no favors but it didn't completely collapse until Maduro.

If Venezuela recovers and improves, are you willing to fundamentally change your opinion about US interventions?

[estearum]

> If Venezuela recovers and improves, are you willing to fundamentally change your opinion about US interventions?

Uhh, no?

My opinion is that US interventions are incredibly risky. There have been numerous successes. There have also been numerous failures. Both have required immense resources and focus from us.

Some interventions are worth the risk, and others are not. I have not seen any compelling rationale for the risk-reward of this particular intervention, and have very low hopes for the follow through, which makes the risk-reward calculus even worse.

[JKCalhoun]

Agree.

If I wear a blindfold, cross a highway and am not hit by a car, am I willing to concede that crossing the highway blindfolded is safe?

[mupuff1234]

You don't think Venezuela having the largest oils reserves on the planet and it being a strong ally to Russia, Iran and China make the possible reward fairly significant from a US standpoint?

[estearum]

Sure it's conceivable. Can you go a level deeper on your analysis?

Are you suggesting that cutting off oil flow to those nations will be advantageous to us? Is this like... tomorrow? During a potential armed conflict? When?

By what specific mechanism does the US assert "control" over the oil? POTUS just now said it's via a ground occupation "until transition of power." What's the transition plan?

[mupuff1234]

Not cutting off, but it's enough that the US increases oil supply which lowers the prices to significantly hurt Russia and Iran. And then you have China which is the main consumer of Venezuelan oil so you get another point of leverage.

Also probably helps to ensure the petro dollar is here to stay for longer.

Obviously this is a very shallow analysis, and there's definitely significant risks, but I do think it's obvious that it has large potential upsides.

[estearum]

Well... POTUS just said that the plan is to sell large amounts of Venezuelan oil to China and Russia.

So again: conceivably sure, but the details matter. The details we have right now do not look very promising IMO.

[jacquesm]

It's not shallow, it is gullible. Of course Trump has an angle otherwise he wouldn't have done this. We can speculate about what the angle is but there is absolutely no way that he did this for the good of the Venezuelan population.

Edit: So, that took only 8 minutes, the other shoe just dropped, it was about the oil after all. Where do I collect my check?

[mupuff1234]

Oh yeah, I'm certain the intent behind this wasn't for the sake of the Venezuelan population, but that in itself doesn't mean it won't result in a better outcome for the population (but also not saying that it will)

[Loudergood]

In the short term this will likely decrease oil supply and drive up oil revenue for Russia.

[mupuff1234]

Venezuela supplies less than 1% of the world's oil, basically meaningless.

[qcnguy]

China is heavily dependent on oil imports and a big part of Germany's defeat in WW2 was due to difficulties obtaining oil. This move may - if successful - change the calculation over Taiwan

[estearum]

POTUS said his plan is to sell vast amounts of Venezuelan oil to China and Russia.

So what you say may happen, but not if "it" (being the plan stated by the orchestrator and executor of said move) is successful.

[JKCalhoun]

"…it being a strong ally to Russia, Iran and China…"

You're making a pretty good case for high risk.

[mupuff1234]

You could easily say the same thing about not doing anything.

But also remember that Russia is occupied in Ukraine and couldn't even help the Assad regime which was a much closer ally, and same with Iran.

[cloverich]

i think the argument is Venezuela can help - or hurt - Russia.

[NicoJuicy]

This is all about China, not Russia

[ElectricalUnion]

> strong ally to Russia, Iran and China

It's more like (similar to other sanctioned countries) "forcibly coerced by the USA into being a ally of Russia, Iran and China by sanctions".

[singpolyma3]

Since the purpose of the interventions is to get more access for US oil companies, they are always successes

[catlifeonmars]

> Iraq was never a democracy. It bounced from monarchy to military rule to one party rule to Hussein's personal dictatorship.

In reference to this, have you seen the footage of Saddam Hussein taking power? It’s chilling.

[jacquesm]

Ethics debates are not served by utilitarian arguments.

[andsoitis]

> Ethics debates are not served by utilitarian arguments.

There isn't just a single universally agreed upon moral framework that serves as the basis for ethics.

Depending on whether you adopt a Rawlsian, Utilitarian, Libertarian, or Communitarian moral framework, your actions would look different depending on the circumstances.

Specially, the Utilitarian moral framework optimizes for the greatest good for the greatest number. Willing to sacrifice the few of the many. It might not be your or my moral framework, but I don't know that we can rule it out as a valid way to approach ethics.

[jacquesm]

> Specially, the Utilitarian moral framework optimizes for the greatest good for the greatest number.

No, the proponents of the utilitarian moral framework try to justify illegal actions retrospectively if the outcome was good and refuse to take responsibility if it is bad.

Ethics should guide your decisions beforehand and require you to take responsibility for all possible outcomes.

[andsoitis]

Not sure I follow your line of thinking.

Are you arguing that Utilitarianism isn't a way to guide decisions? And are you saying it is an invalid moral framework?

FWIW, many ethicists suggest using multiple frameworks and would argue using Utilitarianism for policy.

For example, in the EU utilitarianism is rarely used as the sole moral foundation but serves as the primary tool for practical decision-making and public policy. Most visible in how the EU balances competing interests to achieve the "greatest good".

[card_zero]

There's a lot of unprincipled ethicists around.

[stickfigure]

I have no idea what you're saying.

If your hand is on the track switch, you're just as responsible for the trolley no matter which way it goes. Walking away from the switch does not absolve you.

[jablongo]

Would the Rawlsian say this is unacceptable?

[Hikikomori]

Ah so US will allow Venezuela to profit from their own oil? This time surely

[jacquesm]

I can't wait for the Total Energies or Shell Oil announcement.

[Hikikomori]

With investments from Kushners Saudi fund.

[JKCalhoun]

You know there are boardroom meetings going on right now…

[jacquesm]

100% on the money this comment. This is all about the spoils and absolutely not about the people or the drugs.

Thinking about this some more: good chance this whole thing was decided in a board room a while ago.

[qcnguy]

Yes it will. Iraqi government budget is ~88% funded by oil revenues.

[amanaplanacanal]

I'm not sure using examples from the bush administration are necessarily relevant to the actions of the trump administration.