920
This photo was taken at the White House Protest against the current American Venezuela War
(ani.social)
this post was submitted on 04 Jan 2026
920 points (98.5% liked)
pics
27536 readers
518 users here now
Rules:
1.. Please mark original photos with [OC] in the title if you're the photographer
2..Pictures containing a politician from any country or planet are prohibited, this is a community voted on rule.
3.. Image must be a photograph, no AI or digital art.
4.. No NSFW/Cosplay/Spam/Trolling images.
5.. Be civil. No racism or bigotry.
Photo of the Week Rule(s):
1.. On Fridays, the most upvoted original, marked [OC], photo posted between Friday and Thursday will be the next week's banner and featured photo.
2.. The weekly photos will be saved for an end of the year run off.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://mastodon.world/about
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Who cares if he had the authority or not.
What matters is that the people of Venezuela did not consent to his imperialistic actions. Not whether he has authority to make imperialistic actions.
Democrats, mostly. If he'd just received permission in advance (a comically easy feat in this pro-war legislature) he could have straight up leveled Caracas and all we'd be reading in the news are "Why Venezuelans deserved it" Op-Eds.
I gotta disagree. They're already greeting us as liberators. I've received dozens of AI generated videos of Venezuelans clapping and cheering and waving "Give Trump The Nobel Peace Prize Now" banners over freeways full of cars painted like American flags.
I'd argue America has shown it's the one country that other countries do have a right to interfere with. After ~70 years of being the drunken, overconfident, asshole that's ruining the experience for everyone at the bar because we've decided we're the bouncer. On some level we've kinda made ourselves everyone's problem.
It's not a perfect analogy, because in a bar everyone else could just leave, and that's not an option when you're sharing a planet.
It would imply a seismic shift in the military capacity of the United States. We'd be looking at a country whose dozen-odd aircraft carriers and legions of armored cavalry and massive panopticon of intelligence gathering had fully failed to prevent the most high profile security disaster since 9/11.
Liberals would be celebrating quietly while they made big frowny faces about the deplorable state of national security publicly. Conservatives would be frothing with rage and threatening to nuke half a dozen major metropolitan areas. JD Vance would be dick deep in a celebratory couch cushion in between photo-ops where he demanded bloody-fisted retribution.
There's no such thing as "rights" with regard to national sovereignty. Only Might Makes Right. The people of the various states can defend themselves and one another via an international commitment to mutual aid. Or nationalist kingpins can build up military fiefs and raid one another's exposed flanks as opportunity presents. But the idea that any given national leadership is above intervention has never been true.
If anything, its the opposite of true. Country leaders appear to have a prerogative to engage one another - diplomatically or militarily - in pursuit of foreign policy aims. Had Venezuelans been as active in bribing and extorting American politicians as the Saudis or the Israelis, I suspect they'd be in a lot better of a position than they are today.
Is there another country that we can pay to do this? Is there another one that we can encourage to do this? Because I'm pretty sure the majority of Americans are all for this.
It also ignores that he clearly did the authority to do it, by virtue of having done it and not being stopped.
Don’t go giving states the authority to do things, and they won’t have any authority to do things.
Authority doesn’t make an act correct.
The people of Venezuela didn't consent to Maduro ruling over them either.
And that's about 98% too many after seeing his first stint.
36% of eligible voters didn't vote. So 68% of Americans either wanted Trump or didn't really care.
Absurd false equivalency.
Yes. Both what I say and you say can be true at once.
Reactionary Venezuelan political parties will run on a platform of "Kill all the native peoples and sell our national assets for pennies on the dollar to a foreign oil company", lose outside of a few major petrochemical enclaves, and then complain the election was stolen.
Why do American liberals think J6 is cool in every other country but their own?
What are you talking about? Maduro is the Trump of Venezuela, rigging elections and preventing opponents from running, like the most recent Nobel Prize winner. Just because Trump is against someone doesn't automatically make that person the complete opposite of Trump.
Both Trump and Maduro are gangsters. Gangsters often take out other gangsters so they can take control of their territory. When you see a mafia hit do you automatically assume the guy that got whacked must have been anti-mafia LOL?
I remember when liberals were claiming Bernie Sanders was the Trump of the Democratic Party.