This is an editorial published by the editorial committee, so it is in fact the official position.
0. 마두로는 개새끼가 맞다.
1. But Maduro being an asshole and ousting Maduro by force are two different things. Forget Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Guatemala, Nicaragua, etc.
2. They say the reason for the operation is to ‘clean up drug terrorists who pose a threat to national security’, but that’s bullshit. Venezuela doesn’t make much fentanyl, and they make some cocaine, but most of it is from Europe.
And from the perspective of legal/defense experts or just common sense, drug smuggling attempts cannot be seen as an act aimed at overthrowing the government or military defeat. Therefore, the claim that it is a ‘threat to national security’ is also absurd.
3. Wasn’t Trump an opponent of foreign military intervention?
4. If it’s so confident, why isn’t it approved by Congress?
Honestly, you’re not confident either.
Why aren’t politicians held accountable for the war through debate and voting?
Look at Iraq. Later, Hillary, who supported, was caught, and Obama, who opposed, was reevaluated. These procedures do not exist for nothing.
5. This invasion is unreasonable both idealistically and realistically.
Idealism: An extrajudicial murder in which a person is shot to death, disregarding international and domestic laws, based solely on suspicion.
ㄴ(This is about shooting down a ship before the invasion)
Realism: Not in the national security interest of the United States.
It was successful in Panama, but it is different now than it was then. Panama was a small country, and because of the canal, the U.S. military and U.S. officials had been active for decades.
Venezuela is a much larger country, and although Maduro has been captured, the generals who form the basis of the regime remain the same.
I know very well that Venezuelans were eager for regime change and even wanted military intervention. But expectations and reality are different. If follow-up measures are not taken properly, violence may increase rapidly, food and energy shortages may occur, and refugees may increase.
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
[International] US airstrikes on Venezuela. “Capture of Maduro” | YTN
1. This is not a problem that will end with arresting Maduro. Currently, Venezuela has a strong anti-Americanism. Do you think that arresting Maduro will make this disappear?
2. Maduro has a symbiotic relationship with the military, and it is important whether the Venezuelan military was discussed in advance when he carried out the arrest operation. If he was removed like this without the military’s cooperation, it is difficult to deal with it.
3. Currently, the Venezuelan opposition is not just Machado, but is divided into other forces. Is there any guarantee that they will unite and lead democratization?
4. I don’t know if the United States negotiates with the Venezuelan military, but since Trump said he would take Venezuelan oil for himself, there is no way the military would give up this interest, so it is a question of whether the military will follow suit. In all likelihood, problems will arise again.
5. When the U.S. arrested Noriega and invaded Grenada, even Western allies did not explicitly side with the U.S. In any case, the issue of compliance with it is a matter of idle talk because international law is meaningless, but just as the anti-American movement spread strongly in Central and South America after Noriega’s arrest, this does not mean that there is a possibility that this incident will turn out that way as well.
6. Trump may be happy to promote himself now, but now the moment a problem arises in Venezuela, it means that it will be entirely the responsibility of the United States. If the Venezuelan army were to collapse, it would not be possible to occupy it unless there was a large-scale all-out war, and even if it were occupied, it would be difficult to maintain it. So is it possible to take care of it in the future?
-6