La Crisis Venezolana: The Crisis in Venezuela

[US-SSR]

As for who the "legal" president of Venezuela might be, I'm afraid we've moved beyond legalities. Arguing about who started it is a bit of who-struck-John. Increasingly it seems Maduro is losing international legitimacy -- no one much cares about the Non-Aligned Movement any more btw -- while Guaido has yet to demonstrate support from the security forces without which his claim to assert any authority must be in doubt.

Trump said something doesn't mean a loss of legitimacy. The EU member states wouldn't be asking Maduro to hold an election, if they didn't think he was the leader, meaning that the above quote is in conflict with this one:

EU nations including Spain, France, Germany, the UK and the Netherlands (which has military bases on its islands off the Venezuelan coast) have said they will recognize Guaido as head of state if there is no plan for free and fair elections in Venezuela within eight days. The upshot of this, as with the US, is that the Maduro regime would no longer have access to Venezuelan financial assets in those countries.

Odd. They both seem to be by the same poster, from the same post, and yet they're in conflict. I can ask the mods to warn you, if you flame me on NSG. Doesn't make me a mod. The EU nations are sending a conditional request to Maduro, meaning that they still recognize him as leader.

The point is that it is pointless at this point to make legalistic arguments about who the "legal president" of Venezuela is. According to the Chavistas the fraudulent election makes their man the president; according to the resistance the National Assembly action makes their man the president. According to some other nations Guaido is president, according to others Maduro is, eight days from now most of the EU might change its mind. For the moment Maduro seems to retain the loyalty of the security forces but there are hints and whispers that that might be in jeopardy. But in the nations that recognize Guaido, Maduro has no access to Venezuelan financial or other assets (for our dabbing pigeon friend, and as noted above, that is the main significance of the US et. al's recognition of Guaido). For those of us with no skin in the game it may make an interesting sort of moot international court discussion, but without any practical effect.

[Sneudal]

China won't be bothered though, It's Chinese policy not to interfere in such situations. Once that policy changes a lot in the world will change with it. If anything, we can only hope Cuba and/or Bolivia will talk some sense into Maduro, i suppose it's really the only peaceful way for him to step down (or hold new, proper elections), especially now that the military reaffirmed its support for him.

Seems you missed this part - https://venezuelanalysis.com/News/13647

Not sure what you're referring to.

[Sneudal]

Some good news.
Refusing to withdraw our embassy worked,
Maduro backed down.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnew ... lomats.amp

Also Venezuela’s military attaché to the US and most of the Venezuelan embassy aligns with Guaido.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.miamih ... 29345.html

Finally the EU has given Maduro 8 days to hold free and fair elections, or the EU will recognize Guaido.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reu ... SKCN1PK0D6

Maduro already dismissed the demands of the E.U.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Some good news.
Refusing to withdraw our embassy worked,
Maduro backed down.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnew ... lomats.amp

Also Venezuela’s military attaché to the US and most of the Venezuelan embassy aligns with Guaido.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.miamih ... 29345.html

Finally the EU has given Maduro 8 days to hold free and fair elections, or the EU will recognize Guaido.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reu ... SKCN1PK0D6

Maduro already dismissed the demands of the E.U.

Like he dismissed those US ambassadors.

[Painisia]

If Maduro refuses to announce new elections when the deadline is over given by the EU, what will be the consequences? I must say that I am rather perplexed by the current situation in Venezuela. The whole country supports Mr Gouida as President, while the army, having a better chance to change things, supports Maduro. It seems this crisis while continue forever if military intervention isn't being considered by foreign countries...

[Frievolk]

If Maduro refuses to announce new elections when the deadline is over given by the EU, what will be the consequences? I must say that I am rather perplexed by the current situation in Venezuela. The whole country supports Mr Gouida as President, while the army, having a better chance to change things, supports Maduro. It seems this crisis while continue forever if military intervention isn't being considered by foreign countries...

The problem with gunboat diplomacy is that it becomes meaningless if you lack the gunboats for it. Venezuela has a history of suffering gunboat diplomacy. If the Europeans don't have something *really* harsh planned for the eventuality that an election doesn't happen, this is going to be hilarious.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Maduro already dismissed the demands of the E.U.

Like he dismissed those US ambassadors.

What's the EU going to do? Write a strongly worded letter?

The US can actually topple his regime with little effort; he has more to fear from us than any country in Europe, especially since he's in our backyard while they're in a completely different hemisphere.

[The Archregimancy]

Like he dismissed those US ambassadors.

What's the EU going to do? Write a strongly worded letter?

The US can actually topple his regime with little effort

While I've had some sympathy towards many of your previous posts on Venezuela, I'd dispute the underlined sentence.

Certainly the US is better-placed to take action against Maduro's government than any European nation or alliance of European nations, that much is inarguable; but 'topple with little effort'? While that perhaps depends on what you mean by 'topple', the main evidence that it's not at all straightforward is that Maduro - despite everything that's gone wrong over the last four years - is still in power. And so long as he's backed by the armed forces and PDVSA (which increasingly overlap), he's likely to remain in power.

Maduro will fall as and when he's no longer backed by the armed forces (a term I'm using in its broadest sense); I'm not wholly convinced that cleavage will be caused by the United States as and when it does happen.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Like he dismissed those US ambassadors.

What's the EU going to do? Write a strongly worded letter?

The US can actually topple his regime with little effort; he has more to fear from us than any country in Europe, especially since he's in our backyard while they're in a completely different hemisphere.

Doesn't mean it should though.

[Novus America]

Like he dismissed those US ambassadors.

What's the EU going to do? Write a strongly worded letter?

The US can actually topple his regime with little effort; he has more to fear from us than any country in Europe, especially since he's in our backyard while they're in a completely different hemisphere.

Well true the EU has much less leverage they still can seize a transfer lot of assets.
The UK has already frozen the regime from moving or selling its gold reserves in the UK.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.co ... index.html

Plus it will give the opposition a morale boost.

The EU will of course not be particularly decisive or important but it still helps.

[Novus America]

What's the EU going to do? Write a strongly worded letter?

The US can actually topple his regime with little effort

While I've had some sympathy towards many of your previous posts on Venezuela, I'd dispute the underlined sentence.

Certainly the US is better-placed to take action against Maduro's government than any European nation or alliance of European nations, that much is inarguable; but 'topple with little effort'? While that perhaps depends on what you mean by 'topple', the main evidence that it's not at all straightforward is that Maduro - despite everything that's gone wrong over the last four years - is still in power. And so long as he's backed by the armed forces and PDVSA (which increasingly overlap), he's likely to remain in power.

Maduro will fall as and when he's no longer backed by the armed forces (a term I'm using in its broadest sense); I'm not wholly convinced that cleavage will be caused by the United States as and when it does happen.

The US can effectively destroy PDVSA with a stroke of a pen.
But you are correctly the regime has been surprisingly resilient.

The key thing to note this is not really about Maduro, he is not a dictator in the sense that he has nearly absolute control. Rather he is just the public face for a cartel of Venezuela and Cuban gangsters.

Getting rid of them takes more than just getting rid of Maduro.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

What's the EU going to do? Write a strongly worded letter?

The US can actually topple his regime with little effort

While I've had some sympathy towards many of your previous posts on Venezuela, I'd dispute the underlined sentence.

Certainly the US is better-placed to take action against Maduro's government than any European nation or alliance of European nations, that much is inarguable; but 'topple with little effort'? While that perhaps depends on what you mean by 'topple', the main evidence that it's not at all straightforward is that Maduro - despite everything that's gone wrong over the last four years - is still in power. And so long as he's backed by the armed forces and PDVSA (which increasingly overlap), he's likely to remain in power.

Maduro will fall as and when he's no longer backed by the armed forces (a term I'm using in its broadest sense); I'm not wholly convinced that cleavage will be caused by the United States as and when it does happen.

I'm not quite convinced that when push comes to shove the military will back Maduro against a US invasion. For one thing, the attempt would be futile. Another is they'd have to essentially fight two fronts if they face both invasion and a popular uprising at the same time as the former would come in via sea while the latter would sow complete discord in any hope of an organized defense. Maduro's power is starting to wane and even the police and military are starting, albeit slowly, to distance themselves from him.

Venezuela isn't really in a position to repel an invasion, especially not from the US. I'm sure most Venezuelans know this, too. IIRC there were mass desertions by the Iraqi Military when the US invaded and I don't think Venezuela would be any different tbh.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

What's the EU going to do? Write a strongly worded letter?

The US can actually topple his regime with little effort; he has more to fear from us than any country in Europe, especially since he's in our backyard while they're in a completely different hemisphere.

Doesn't mean it should though.

But it still should.

[Sneudal]

If Maduro refuses to announce new elections when the deadline is over given by the EU, what will be the consequences? I must say that I am rather perplexed by the current situation in Venezuela. The whole country supports Mr Gouida as President, while the army, having a better chance to change things, supports Maduro. It seems this crisis while continue forever if military intervention isn't being considered by foreign countries...

The E.U. Will recognize that quasi-dictator, nothing more and nothing less.

And the whole country supports the quasi-dictator? Lol, guess again.

A foreign military intervention only leads to more trouble, it's hardly a solution, as shown in the past.

Like he dismissed those US ambassadors.

What's the EU going to do? Write a strongly worded letter?

The US can actually topple his regime with little effort; he has more to fear from us than any country in Europe, especially since he's in our backyard while they're in a completely different hemisphere.

Lol, nice joke.

[The Archregimancy]

While I've had some sympathy towards many of your previous posts on Venezuela, I'd dispute the underlined sentence.

Certainly the US is better-placed to take action against Maduro's government than any European nation or alliance of European nations, that much is inarguable; but 'topple with little effort'? While that perhaps depends on what you mean by 'topple', the main evidence that it's not at all straightforward is that Maduro - despite everything that's gone wrong over the last four years - is still in power. And so long as he's backed by the armed forces and PDVSA (which increasingly overlap), he's likely to remain in power.

Maduro will fall as and when he's no longer backed by the armed forces (a term I'm using in its broadest sense); I'm not wholly convinced that cleavage will be caused by the United States as and when it does happen.

I'm not quite convinced that when push comes to shove the military will back Maduro against a US invasion. For one thing, the attempt would be futile. Another is they'd have to essentially fight two fronts if they face both invasion and a popular uprising at the same time as the former would come in via sea while the latter would sow complete discord in any hope of an organized defense. Maduro's power is starting to wane and even the police and military are starting, albeit slowly, to distance themselves from him.

Venezuela isn't really in a position to repel an invasion, especially not from the US. I'm sure most Venezuelans know this, too. IIRC there were mass desertions by the Iraqi Military when the US invaded and I don't think Venezuela would be any different tbh.

I think an invasion would be a disastrous error.

I don't doubt that Maduro could be forced out at the point of a gun, but I very much doubt that any resulting US-backed government could easily control the entirety of Venezuela's varied and often difficult territory. The likely result would be years of instability, a spike in international oil prices, and growing popular resentment against the US-backed government; the majority of Venezuelans may now dislike Maduro, but that doesn't necessarily mean they would welcome in the United States - or, for that matter, Colombia or Brazil.

And I'm really not sure that Iraq is a happy analogy given the long-term consequences of that action. The initial victory would likely prove to be easy; it's the follow-up that would prove to be the hard part. I see nothing that gives me confidence in the ability of the United States to successfully manage the latter.

This also assumes that the rest of South America backs, or at least acquiesces in, any invasion. That's also optimistic. Colombia, Chile, Brazil and Argentina may be willing to extend diplomatic recognition to Guaido; given their histories, they're likely significantly less likely to back a physical invasion, whether by the United States or a neighbouring power.

And all of that ignores the time and effort necessary to organise an invasion. Given the topography, it's not remotely straightforward.

[Imperializt Russia]

Well, that's not strictly how it happened, is it.
It was one "regime", the Russian Soviet regime, on eastern Europe.

Most of Eastern Europe was very happy to leave that regime in the 1980s.
Oh, and a reminder that Russian tanks shelled the parliament building in 1993.

While you make a good point overall, those tanks were commanded by Yeltsin to attack the parliament because they were refusing his reforms. The effect of this was also to help Yeltsin shove through a new constitution that gave the President quasi-dictatorial powers and eventually led to the rise of Putin.

The fundamental point is that the 1993 Constitutional Crisis was the end of Soviet Russia, and was patently not a "bloodless transition". Hundreds of people were killed or wounded, by armed force.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

What's the EU going to do? Write a strongly worded letter?

The US can actually topple his regime with little effort; he has more to fear from us than any country in Europe, especially since he's in our backyard while they're in a completely different hemisphere.

Lol, nice joke.

Afghanistan, the Graveyard of Empires, which at the time was run by psychotic zealots, fell in a month and a half and they don't even have a coast. Tell me again about how difficult it will be to remove an unpopular dictator from Venezuela. I'm just not seeing it.

I'm not quite convinced that when push comes to shove the military will back Maduro against a US invasion. For one thing, the attempt would be futile. Another is they'd have to essentially fight two fronts if they face both invasion and a popular uprising at the same time as the former would come in via sea while the latter would sow complete discord in any hope of an organized defense. Maduro's power is starting to wane and even the police and military are starting, albeit slowly, to distance themselves from him.

Venezuela isn't really in a position to repel an invasion, especially not from the US. I'm sure most Venezuelans know this, too. IIRC there were mass desertions by the Iraqi Military when the US invaded and I don't think Venezuela would be any different tbh.

I think an invasion would be a disastrous error.

I don't doubt that Maduro could be forced out at the point of a gun, but I very much doubt that any resulting US-backed government could easily control the entirety of Venezuela's varied and often difficult territory. The likely result would be years of instability, a spike in international oil prices, and growing popular resentment against the US-backed government; the majority of Venezuelans may now dislike Maduro, but that doesn't necessarily mean they would welcome in the United States - or, for that matter, Colombia or Brazil.

And I'm really not sure that Iraq is a happy analogy given the long-term consequences of that action. The initial victory would likely prove to be easy; it's the follow-up that would prove to be the hard part. I see nothing that gives me confidence in the ability of the United States to successfully manage the latter.

This also assumes that the rest of South America backs, or at least acquiesces in, any invasion. That's also optimistic. Colombia, Chile, Brazil and Argentina may be willing to extend diplomatic recognition to Guaido; given their histories, they're likely significantly less likely to back a physical invasion, whether by the United States or a neighbouring power.

And all of that ignores the time and effort necessary to organise an invasion. Given the topography, it's not remotely straightforward.

To be fair, I said we could topple Maduro quite easily; I said nothing about the aftermath.

And again, Venezuela's topography is no worse than Afghanistan's and the latter was ran by psychotic zealots and lacked a coast. An invasion would be easy, it's picking up the pieces afterwards that are up for debate. Certainly Latin America has a very skewered tendency toward Anti-Americanism - sometimes justified, sometimes not. I won't pretend it will be easy but I don't see any reason it would last as long as, say, Afghanistan or Iraq. There may not even be need for an occupation at all.

[Novus America]

Lol, nice joke.

Afghanistan, the Graveyard of Empires, which at the time was run by psychotic zealots, fell in a month and a half and they don't even have a coast. Tell me again about how difficult it will be to remove an unpopular dictator from Venezuela. I'm just not seeing it.

I think an invasion would be a disastrous error.

I don't doubt that Maduro could be forced out at the point of a gun, but I very much doubt that any resulting US-backed government could easily control the entirety of Venezuela's varied and often difficult territory. The likely result would be years of instability, a spike in international oil prices, and growing popular resentment against the US-backed government; the majority of Venezuelans may now dislike Maduro, but that doesn't necessarily mean they would welcome in the United States - or, for that matter, Colombia or Brazil.

And I'm really not sure that Iraq is a happy analogy given the long-term consequences of that action. The initial victory would likely prove to be easy; it's the follow-up that would prove to be the hard part. I see nothing that gives me confidence in the ability of the United States to successfully manage the latter.

This also assumes that the rest of South America backs, or at least acquiesces in, any invasion. That's also optimistic. Colombia, Chile, Brazil and Argentina may be willing to extend diplomatic recognition to Guaido; given their histories, they're likely significantly less likely to back a physical invasion, whether by the United States or a neighbouring power.

And all of that ignores the time and effort necessary to organise an invasion. Given the topography, it's not remotely straightforward.

To be fair, I said we could topple Maduro quite easily; I said nothing about the aftermath.

And again, Venezuela's topography is no worse than Afghanistan's and the latter was ran by psychotic zealots and lacked a coast. An invasion would be easy, it's picking up the pieces afterwards that are up for debate. Certainly Latin America has a very skewered tendency toward Anti-Americanism - sometimes justified, sometimes not. I won't pretend it will be easy but I don't see any reason it would last as long as, say, Afghanistan or Iraq. There may not even be need for an occupation at all.

The actual invasion would be easy. The drug dealing gangsters that control the military care about money, they are unlikely to want to die for their cause.

Like you said the aftermath is where it gets tricky. Toppling the the regime would be easy.
Building a stable country afterwards is the hard part, though Venezuela does not have as much of a language and cultural barrier, religious insanity, and actually has had a working democracy before.

Panama was actually quite easy. The “intervention never works” crowd always cherry picks.

Anyways I doubt a full blow attack will happen.

Seizing and redistributing PDVSAs cash flow would be a better option.

[Shrillland]

Afghanistan, the Graveyard of Empires, which at the time was run by psychotic zealots, fell in a month and a half and they don't even have a coast. Tell me again about how difficult it will be to remove an unpopular dictator from Venezuela. I'm just not seeing it.



To be fair, I said we could topple Maduro quite easily; I said nothing about the aftermath.

And again, Venezuela's topography is no worse than Afghanistan's and the latter was ran by psychotic zealots and lacked a coast. An invasion would be easy, it's picking up the pieces afterwards that are up for debate. Certainly Latin America has a very skewered tendency toward Anti-Americanism - sometimes justified, sometimes not. I won't pretend it will be easy but I don't see any reason it would last as long as, say, Afghanistan or Iraq. There may not even be need for an occupation at all.

The actual invasion would be easy. The drug dealing gangsters that control the military care about money, they are unlikely to want to die for their cause.

Like you said the aftermath is where it gets tricky. Toppling the the regime would be easy.
Building a stable country afterwards is the hard part, though Venezuela does not have as much of a language and cultural barrier, religious insanity, and actually has had a working democracy before.

Panama was actually quite easy. The “intervention never works” crowd always cherry picks.

Anyways I doubt a full blow attack will happen.

Seizing and redistributing PDVSAs cash flow would be a better option.

The people wouldn't support that. PDVSA's been in state hands for 42 years, and even Guaido's plans involve keeping it there to make Venezuela the largest oil exporter in the world...though what they actually should be doing is diversifying the economy to cure the terminal case of Dutch Disease that is a major contributor to the current unpleasantness.

[Novus America]

The actual invasion would be easy. The drug dealing gangsters that control the military care about money, they are unlikely to want to die for their cause.

Like you said the aftermath is where it gets tricky. Toppling the the regime would be easy.
Building a stable country afterwards is the hard part, though Venezuela does not have as much of a language and cultural barrier, religious insanity, and actually has had a working democracy before.

Panama was actually quite easy. The “intervention never works” crowd always cherry picks.

Anyways I doubt a full blow attack will happen.

Seizing and redistributing PDVSAs cash flow would be a better option.

The people wouldn't support that. PDVSA's been in state hands for 42 years, and even Guaido's plans involve keeping it there to make Venezuela the largest oil exporter in the world...though what they actually should be doing is diversifying the economy to cure the terminal case of Dutch Disease that is a major contributor to the current unpleasantness.

The US seizing and redistributing the cash flow from the US would not remove it from state hands (though it might lose CITGO to repay its debts to US companies).

It would simply be ensuring the billions of dollars the US sends to to Venezuela goes to the National Assembly and Guaido.

The US cannot take PDVSA’s Venezuelan assets (without an invasion) and certainly does want to.
But PDVSA’s money comes from the US.

Though making Venezuela the biggest exporter is an absurd goal for Guaido, it cannot be done.
There is not enough demand and Venezuelan oil quality and infrastructure is too shitty.

Certainly rebuilding the agricultural and other sectors should be the main goal.

[Sneudal]

Lol, nice joke.

Afghanistan, the Graveyard of Empires, which at the time was run by psychotic zealots, fell in a month and a half and they don't even have a coast. Tell me again about how difficult it will be to remove an unpopular dictator from Venezuela. I'm just not seeing it.

Tell me again, what's the current situation in Afghanistan? Oh that's right, the Taliban is pretty much back to its former strenght. After 18 years the U.S. achieved close to nothing in Afghanistan, not to forget that Venezuela will likely end up even worse.

Winning battles doesn't mean jack shit in the kind of conflicts that are fought today.

[Novus America]

Afghanistan, the Graveyard of Empires, which at the time was run by psychotic zealots, fell in a month and a half and they don't even have a coast. Tell me again about how difficult it will be to remove an unpopular dictator from Venezuela. I'm just not seeing it.

Tell me again, what's the current situation in Afghanistan? Oh that's right, the Taliban is pretty much back to its former strenght. After 18 years the U.S. achieved close to nothing in Afghanistan, not to forget that Venezuela will likely end up even worse.

Winning battles doesn't mean jack shit in the kind of conflicts that are fought today.

Again if the goal is simply to remove the Maduro we can easily do that.
The Taliban are still not in power, although the control good parts of the countryside.

And Panama worked out fine.

Afghanistan is a a different case because the population is so tribal, fanatically religious and culturally and linguistically different.

But again I hope a transition can occur without actual military operations.

Just shifting the cash flows to Guaido and the National Assembly is what is needed.

The military will not stay loyal to the gangsters if they cannot pay them off.

[Sneudal]

Tell me again, what's the current situation in Afghanistan? Oh that's right, the Taliban is pretty much back to its former strenght. After 18 years the U.S. achieved close to nothing in Afghanistan, not to forget that Venezuela will likely end up even worse.

Winning battles doesn't mean jack shit in the kind of conflicts that are fought today.

Again if the goal is simply to remove the Maduro we can easily do that.
The Taliban are still not in power, although the control good parts of the countryside.

And Panama worked out fine.

Afghanistan is a a different case because the population is so tribal, fanatically religious and culturally and linguistically different.

But again I hope a transition can occur without actual military operations.

Just shifting the cash flows to Guaido and the National Assembly is what is needed.

The military will not stay loyal to the gangsters if they cannot pay them off.

Well ofcourse it wouldn't be hard to remove Maduro, but that's usually only the beginning for said conflicts.
I only adressed Afghanistan as the previous poster mentioned it; Though i doubt culture, language or religion is that much of a factor. Yes, it was to Afghanistan due to the nature of the conflict, but Venezuela would be a whole other conflict.

Same here, military operations propbably won't solve anything, and surely will make the situation worse.

I disagree with the support of the quasi-dictator, i don't see any valid reason as to why we should blindly support an undemocratic 'self-declared president'. I'd rather see pressure on Maduro through conventional means, and possibly seek mediation through states that Maduro still considers friendly (China, Russia, Cuba, Bolivia etc.).

[US-SSR]

If Maduro refuses to announce new elections when the deadline is over given by the EU, what will be the consequences? I must say that I am rather perplexed by the current situation in Venezuela. The whole country supports Mr Gouida as President, while the army, having a better chance to change things, supports Maduro. It seems this crisis while continue forever if military intervention isn't being considered by foreign countries...

As has been noted here several times, the main effect of EU and other nations' recognition of Guaido rather than Maduro is to cut off the Maduro regime's access to any financial or other assets held overseas. To the extent that reduces the Maduro regime's ability to pay off the people, e.g. in the security forces, it needs to pay off the remain in power, it makes that regime less likely to be able to retain its local authority. That at least seems to be the theory.

The US can actually topple his regime with little effort; he has more to fear from us than any country in Europe, especially since he's in our backyard while they're in a completely different hemisphere.

I wouldn't say "with little effort." The US does not have the force level in the region it has in others, such as Europe, Asia or the Middle East. There are no US bases in country as there were in Panama (remember Panama? 1989?); the Netherlands does have some on its islands off the Venezuelan coast though. I have no idea of the size of the Venezuelan military but it seems from here to be as well-organized and equipped as any other in the region, with Russian equipment of course. And as pointed out by others the US toppled the Saddam regime with relatively little effort other than overwhelming force, a miscalculated misadventure that cost hundreds of thousands of lives, trillions of dollars and much of its prestige and that is still going on today. Even if the Commander-in-Chief might not understand, his advisors certainly realize the US people are not going to stomach a protracted, bloody involvement in Latin America on top of the ones we currently have around the world.

(tl;dr: go back to your video games, son, the adults are talking here.)

Which begs the question: what if the international efforts to bring down the Maduro regime don't work, or don't work fast enough? What then? What's Plan B? The best we can get out of Pompeo is that he "won't speculate" on what the US would do. Really? Isn't he the Secretary of feckin' State?

[Bahktar]

While I would prefer it don't happen, I wouldn't mind a coalition established by Colombia, Brazil, USA and other pro-Guaido countries to basically give Maduro an ultimatum to resign & allow free elections, with a promise to create a transitional government, monitored by the EU and other reputable organizations, or said coalition will intervene militarily. While I feel that Venezuela's military might resist, such a coalition could topple it and who is to say that when the defense apparatus realizes that they're in really deep trouble if Maduro doesn't resign, they might as well remove Maduro himself or defect in an invasion.