First, I must iterate that while I am a non-TS, I kinda support the overthrow and capture of Nicolás Maduro and understand why Trump had to do it. He was able to do it quickly and efficiently without any American soldiers being killed and I honestly don't really care if he had Congressional approval or not since US Presidents (both GOP and Dem) have been using their military authority since the Cold War. My only concern is if this becomes a long drawn out military occupation like that of Iraq or Afghanistan.
After news of Maduro's capture, I started thinking about the history of US foreign policy and the petrodollar system, namely:
- Venezuela currently has the largest oil reserves of any nation
- Hugo Chavez nationalized Venezuelan oil in 2007
- The June 1974 Saudi-US pact established the petrodollar system in which oil sales would be transacted with the USD
- The petrodollar system underpins the USD as the global reserve currency
- The BRICS nations have been trying to shift away from dependence on the USD with their own currency
- Venezuela is a close BRICS ally and enemy of the US
While the Trump administration has stated that Maduro's capture was motivated by narcoterrorism and drug trafficking, do you think the perpetuation of the petrodollar system was at all a factor? How concerned should the we be about the BRICS nations threatening the global reliance on the USD petrodollar? Do you think the petrodollar system is sustainable?
AskTrumpSupporters is a Q&A subreddit dedicated to better understanding the views of Trump Supporters, and why they hold those views.
For all participants:
Flair is required to participate
Be excellent to each other
For Nonsupporters/Undecided:
No top level comments
All comments must seek to clarify the Trump supporter's position
For Trump Supporters:
Helpful links for more info:
Rules | Rule Exceptions | Posting Guidelines | Commenting Guidelines
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Everyone trying to pin it on one thing is missing the big picture. The reality is Venezuela had a rap sheet so long it basically blew past any acceptable threat thresholds for a number of different agencies, Treasury/Petrodollar system being just one.
Venezuela is intertwined with Russian oil and weapons trade, joint production, and senior Venezuelan military officials openly engaged in narco-terrorism.
With China, it functions as a financial and industrial backstop, linking Chinese refineries supplied with sanction-evading Venezuelan oil, Chinese banking systems laundering cartel funds, and Iranian-Venezuelan financial ties routed through the Iran-Venezuela Bi-National Bank.
Transnational cartels are the downstream expression. State-linked criminal networks like the Cartel of the Suns operate with impunity, and narco subs can reach our shores.
Maybe the largest tipping point was Ukraine demonstrating a successful strike on a Russian submarine docked at Novorossiysk, one of Russia’s most heavily defended naval bases. The first known underwater-drone attack on a submarine in port essentially means Pearl Harbor can happen anywhere.
When you simultaneously consider the Taiwan strait, Somaliland (mouth of the Red Sea), Iran, pushing China out of the Panama Canal, Venezuela, Novorossiysk, Ukraine mineral deal, Greenland, Abraham Accords, re-industrialization, etc, a pretty cohesive game of containing the Sino-Russo-Iran axis emerges.
This is the heart of the matter -- Empire combatting Revisionist States.
Too bad MAGA doesn't realize the only way to save America is to become Revisionist.
I think that all you’re saying is that they’re not allied to us, we’ve sanctioned them and they’ve established international relationships where they can, shouldn’t they have the right to do that?
Shouldn’t they pursue their own interests if they don’t align with ours?
Yeah, it's absolutely a factor.
Along with plenty of others like Venezuela is a failed state in a region where it's very easy for restless migrants to spread to neighboring states and cause further failed states (the Middle East faces a similar problem, see how the spread of Palestinian migrants caused upheavals in other Arab states).
I'd say deposing a "dictator" is a non-factor and the drug trafficking is basically the lowest factor.
Do you think the US will be successful in regime change and state building this time?
As in previous U.S. “wars”, the goal is not to be “successful”, but to extend MIC spending as long as possible. Venezuela will likely lead to Trillion$ in military spending and contracts, just like Iraq, Afghanistan, Africa, Ukraine, etc.
So it's another "forever war"? Isn't this something Trump campaigned against? No longer being the world police?
Potentially, yes. Time will tell. I do like the idea of curbing drug trade into the U.S. while re-establishing the image of U.S. military capabilities (an image that was definitely tarnished by the Biden Administration), but also do not enjoy the thought of another forever war. Good point, and appreciate your input 😁
It's hard to say man.
It comes down to what the people of Venezuela want honestly.
We talk about failures like Vietnam and Iraq but what's less remembered are the success stories; like the eastern block after the cold war or Germany and Japan after world war 2.
Honestly my opinion is as long as we dont deploy an occupying force to the country there is a good chance they end up preferring the life without US sanctions and a blood thirsty communist dictator then the lives they had before; but i could absolutely be wrong.
Their food will be cheaper, their economy will be better, their day to day life will be safer but there's no way of knowing if they as, as a people actually want that or if they prefer the independence and culture that being in opposition to the world hegemon allows you.
Some nations (like Iraq or Afghanistan) have not been willing to take that deal but other nations (like Poland or Japan) have been willing. Only time will tell what the people of Venezuela actually want.
Hadn’t considered this angle yet, but it totally makes sense. Securing one of the biggest future independent oil producers to exclusively using the petrodollar and also keeping them out of any future BRICS commodity exchanges is the bedrock of both the American monetary system and stacking the deck in our favor by manipulating commodities prices.
The US can’t really stop BRICS effectively on the other side of the world, but it absolutely can (and should) prevent it gaining traction in the Americas.
De-dollarization is probably going to creep along with time but that doesn’t mean we can’t put in some major roadblocks.
If BRICS successfully sets up independent commodities exchanges, that’s going to cause a resetting of prices (higher) like we’ve never seen before. It will likely end our monetary system in hyperinflation. Weimar Republic style.
Whether what happened post Weimar will also be repeated remains to be seen. History usually doesn’t repeat verbatim. But it is the left’s actions that will be most responsible for getting us to that similar point.
I appreciate the honesty. Is it concerning to you that you hadn't considered this angle when it seems (to me) that every non far right new outlet has been saying this?
Isn't it stuff like this that your news sources should be focusing on instead of the glitz and glamour of being the most efficient bully on the block?
I’m on vacation and not heavily engaged in the news cycle. But it doesn’t surprise me that most 3 letter news sources are measuring up short on analysis. Since they always do.
That's fair.
What did you mean by this btw? Can you help me understand the relevance here?
Our current financial predicament of incredible debt is because of overspending. The overwhelming majority of federal spending is entitlements. In 2019 (before debt servicing piled on) > 70% of federal spending was entitlements. I have the pie chart to prove it.
At no point in the past 100 years have Democrats been for reducing current entitlement spending more than Republicans. Beyond that, they've actively moved the Overton Window on it to favor reckless spending with relentless media propaganda buttressing it.
Just consider what if every MSM (leftist) media outlet mouthpiece ran honest monthly stories about the upcoming financial calamity (which is structurally inevitable). What if they (correctly) positioned the need to cut back gently now that people can adjust to or get slammed with all the most vulnerable people impacted most? What if they vigorously went after any politician promising handouts as reckless?
Trump is doing what it takes to keep the wheels from falling off for now, but politicians aren't going to do things that get them impeached or otherwise thrown out. The problem is the electorate. And informing the electorate of their stupidity is the job of the media, who are too busy shilling for short term Democrat gain to be serving the public good.
Isn't it "whattaboutism" to be talking about Democrat entitlement spending in a conversation about Trump's invasion of Venezuela? It doesn't seem to add any value to the current convo and only serves to distract from the topic at hand, no?
Temporarily moving slightly off topic since I see it so often in this sub (from both sides), I would hope that we don't do this in our personal lives, so why do it here? Doesn't it scream insecurity when someone does not accept or refuse the criticism? Or when they feign verbal acceptance of said criticism, they show a failure to internalize it since their mind has so clearly immediately moved on to pointing out unrelated flaws in their opposition. The conversation just doesn't feel...genuine when people are mainly focused on scoring points against the other side.
This for example. I assume that most of your media is right leaning. Yet your (assumed) right leaning media failed to inform you of the elephant in the room: oil. Ironically, you point out the failure of Democrat media. Don't you find it odd that you could have clearly just left it at a generic "media" since we know both sides have issues, yet you choose to specifically talk about the media from the Democrat side, despite this conversation between us opening with the idea that your own media might have failed you?
What do you make of Europe's stability, despite their entitlement spending?
Europe, except for the very few countries with oil and sovereign wealth funds, are beyond fucked.
They lost one of their cash cows with Brexit. They brought in violent criminal leeches by the millions. And they don’t have the structural advantages of the US.
It’s hard to think of how they could be doing much worse TBH.
By what metric do you say they are beyond fucked? Afaik, they have higher reported levels of happiness and life satisfaction.
How happy/satisfied you are with your life (now and projected into the future) - isn't this the primary/only metric we should really care about when considering whether someone is doing well?
Edit:
Let me stress the point. Let's say everything you said here is true. If, at the end of the day, Europeans still report higher levels of happiness and life satisfaction, then what do these criticisms amount to? Do they prove Europe is doing worse than us? Or are they merely cherry-picked datapoints we use to convince ourselves that we have it better? In the face of the metric which actually matters, aren't your data points here just more "whattaboutism"?
That's a fair question. I'm judging them by their structural prognosis, financially and socially.
So for example, if a country is running up huge debt to fund entitlements today, I would rate them poorly because their future is almost certainly going to suck as they pay the deferred price for their folly. Or maybe they imported en masse a very 'peaceful' foreign culture that is completely incompatible with Western values.
So while you can quote happiness indexes, those are inherently retrospective in nature. Not just literally, but because they're the proceeds of many decades of prior decisions (or structural advantage like natural resources). Whereas I'm far more interested in where things are going structurally.
Public opinion is always the lagging indicator. But when the bad times come, as they inevitably will be forced upon them by the circumstances of their own making, I am confident reported happiness will also crater.
Show me the country in history where happiness didn't fall precipitously during forced austerity measures.
It is at this point that I would say it would be near impossible for us to agree here, given a short online back-and-forth. But I'd also say that your response here is fair as well. I suppose this amounts to pattern recognition from our personal experiences to gauge whether the future prognosis for the US/Europe is positive or negative.
To give credit to your statement, Venezuela was extremely happy during maduro's initial reign while times were good, but they
packedlacked the institutions for that prosperity to be stable (after all, 90% of their export was oil, so their whole economy was contingent on the price of a single commodity).I suppose this would depend on what you mean by austerity measures, but I can see your point here.
But anyways, I'm happy to leave it at that. I appreciate that you seem to have actually considered what I've said, and I appreciate your responses.
Since this comment got removed earlier due to the lack of question: I hope your vacation is going well?
Isn’t the US debt to GDP ratio as bad as some European nations and much worse than others? I just had a look and the US is estimated at 100-120%, which is comparable to the UK (101%) and France (114%) but much worse than Germany (64%).
Would you judge the US as more fucked based on the fact that the rate of increase in Debt to GDP is higher in the US and our interest burden is higher than these countries as well?
Isn’t it misleading to frame the problem as curbing entitlement spending, as opposed to the entire spending bill and the overall annual deficit?
Trump’s budgets and deficits were larger than Obama’s and his first year’s budget, and deficit are significantly larger than Biden’s last one, even after the DOGE savings. Why is the failure to curb entitlement spending more of a problem than increasing the defence budget, homeland security budget or decreasing tax revenue?
Entitlements comprise the vast majority of government spending. If they’re not reduced by a lot then nothing of significance is happening and it’s performative lip service.
Don’t misunderstand. Everything needs trimming, military industrial complex welfare included. But the biggest expenditure of all cannot be exempt.
Do you think the American public would be more on board if Presidents were more upfront and honest about their intent in securing the future of the USD petrodollar status?
I don't know if that works as well politically. It's both a more complex idea (bad) and less palatable (sounds/is more selfish). I like honesty, but time and time again it's often not rewarded at the ballot box. Most people really don't like honesty when you look at the evidence objectively.
At the end of the day we largely get the politicians we deserve because of what we choose to reward.
The U.S. and one of the 3-Letter Agencies are way ahead of the game, having created BTC. They have controlled the global acceptance of BTC, and are systematically destroying the Petrodollar while easing the world towards the transfer to BTC as the new global currency. Aside from that, Venezuela was a win-win-win for the Trump Administration: Oil; countering narco-terrorism and drug trafficking; and sending a clear message on U.S. military capabilities to the World.
What makes you think that the 3-letter agencies created Bitcoin? I'm asking because I've also theorized about it as well. It's my belief (based on nothing; it's just a conspiracy theory I hold) that BTC was originally created in order for government agencies to monitor the movement of cash among terror groups and drug cartels since every transaction is on a public ledger. If we see large amounts being moved from one group to another, it may be a red flag that something like a terror attack may occur.
It's funny that you mention cryptocurrency, because the Trump administration is promoting USD-pegged stablecoins such as USDT and USDC within developing countries that don't have very stable currencies. It's almost like the petrodollar system because more demand for USD-pegged stablecoins means that there will be increased demand for US Treasuries, thereby stabilizing the US dollar. Again, another Trump foreign policy that I'm not sure whether or not to support, but understand why it's being done.
Many reasons, which I won’t (can’t) share here because I don’t like the idea of being suicide-ed… but it has followed the same pattern as many other ops. Not to mention the obscene valuation increases for an entirely intangible “asset”. I don’t believe the U.S. Dollar can/will ever be truly stabilized, as the amount of debt is increasing exponentially and will never be recovered. The only play left is for the powers-that-be to maximize their taking of physical assets while inflating away the value of the Dollar. Once that cycle reaches pinnacle, they pull the rug, let the Dollar and every other World currency collapse, and usher in some form of digital-coin as “the Savior”. You are correct about the origins in tracing illicit activity, but this was just a guise to shield from the fact that the tracing was always meant for worldwide surveillance. Every citizen, every transaction… omnipotent power and control.
Why do you think you'd be killed for sharing your reasons?
Who are you referring to?
What does this exactly mean?
What does the pinnacle mean exactly? And by pull the rug, what do you mean? The USD isn't some sort of cryptocurrency. As I mentioned in my post, it's still backed by the petrodollar, not to mention our GDP.
This sounds eerily similar to the Biblical prophecy of 666 in Revelations 13:16-17: "It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name."
Are you suggesting Trump is the Antichrist?
Whoooaaa, you’re really reaching there… I never mentioned anything biblical, nor did I say that this was reaching the pinnacle anytime soon. Hell if I know, could be next year, could be in 10 years, but all of the pieces are in play and it’s pretty easy to see the end game at this point. Purely for conversation and entirely hypothetical, of course.
Alright, it just seemed strange that you capitalized the word "Savior", which usually connotes Jesus Christ or a false messianic figure. But then again, I was raised Christian, so perhaps I was just reading too deep into it.
But I enjoyed reading your response and I appreciate your input. I think discussing/hypothesizing future global events such as these are one of the few things I love talking with Trump supporters about and actually find myself agreeing with some things on.
Just one last point: Could you point me towards some resources that you are reading or watching about BTC and future currency collapse(s) that may happen in the future?
Is fundamental Congressional confusion and disagreement as to the nature and classification of crypto indicia that perhaps the emergence of it as "the Savior" is unlikely? Or is it a 5D chess / psyop campaign to distract and disinform?
Why do you fear being "suicide-ed" re President Trump's / DOGE's / Tulsi Gabbbard's self-stated dismantling of Deep State influence across the federal government?
It seems your points parallel Lyndon LaRouche's claims that the early 2000s would see "the final, breakdown phase of the existing world monetary and financial system", per the elite's weaponization of debt and post-gold transnational final instruments, no?
I think that the petrodollar concern is secondary to ejecting eastern hemisphere influence from the western hemisphere.... Per that declaration that was made recently about that intent.
I think that the narco terrorism angle was pretty much just the excuse for the action and had much less of a contribution toward the decision.
>First, I must iterate that while I am a non-TS, I kinda support the overthrow and capture of Nicolás Maduro and understand why Trump had to do it. He was able to do it quickly and efficiently without any American soldiers being killed and I honestly don't really care if he had Congressional approval or not since US Presidents (both GOP and Dem) have been using their military authority since the Cold War. My only concern is if this becomes a long drawn out military occupation like that of Iraq or Afghanistan.
Just would like to say my perspective and worries are basically the same as you on this.
I think it was a good thing but that is absolutely contingent on it NOT becoming another vietnam or iraq where we spend billions of dollars and thousands of lives and tens of years trying to assimilate a people into the western world who dont want to be assimilated into the western world.
If the people venezuela actually want to join the free world and become a developed nation then i think this will undeniably have been a good decision on Trump's part. But if they DONT want that, if they want to just be a third world drug den perpetually then i'm not sure this will have been the best route.
In the second case, if we dont deploy an occupying force the situation may be salvageable but honestly if Venezuelans dont want to change what their country is i think it might have been better to just keep blowing up the boats the drug smugglers were sending in from there.
>While the Trump administration has stated that Maduro's capture was motivated by narcoterrorism and drug trafficking, do you think the perpetuation of the petrodollar system was at all a factor?
It could be a factor but i doubt its the main motivation; honestly for an oil related motivation the bigger one i suspect was just to drive domestic oil prices lower for Trump's personal political benefit and also to put the squeeze on the Russians in order to get them to the negotiating table on Ukraine as they are basically floating the ruble on a gheto version of the petro dollar right now.
Currently they cant service their debt due to the sanctions and so if less people are buying russian oil (in rubles as the russians demand all oil from them be bought) there is less demand for the ruble and so the ruble is worth less and if the russians cant make debt payments to give their currency value through the traditional method of bond payments either... they could be in a rough spot.
And them being in a rough spot makes it more likely they take a deal with ukraine so the sanctions get dropped so they can start making loan payments again making their national debt (and thus their currency) worth more.
yes it's partially about oil and there is nothing wrong with that. I dont want china having access to it. I think the narco terrorism excuse is legit, and true, but it's akin to getting capone for tax evasion. This is a geopolitical strike that weakens our advesaries and protects our hemisphere
Of course oil was a factor. Oil is a part of national security. Everything runs on oil in some way or another and interrupting the spice flow will harm us. Our dollar is tied to oil as well and we’re trying to hold that together. Do I think it is sustainable? If we fight to sustain it, yes but we’re going to do a fiat dollar crash financial reset anyhow so dollars not as important as getting actual oil.
No. Primarily it was to defeat Chinese air defense systems publicly and quickly.
The recovery of our oil industry assets was secondary, but beneficial.