this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2024
164 points (95.6% liked)

News

23311 readers
5258 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

...

As bitter adversaries, the Trump administration and Maduro regime didn’t agree on, well, anything. Except for the fact that the US government wanted Maduro gone.

After that UN meeting, the Trump administration amped up its efforts around the world to isolate and depose the Venezuelan leader, including by levying additional punishing sanctions against his regime. Much of that diplomatic maneuvering played out in public. But the administration also put into motion another, very much secret prong to the US’s regime-change campaign: a covert CIA-run initiative to help overthrow the Venezuelan strongman.

That campaign would pull off at least one disruptive digital sabotage operation against the Maduro regime in 2019. But the CIA-led initiative—alongside the Trump administration’s wider efforts to get rid of Maduro—would fall well short of its ultimate goal. The story of that secret anti-Maduro effort also lays bare the tensions between an administration with hardliners laser-focused on deposing the Venezuelan autocrat and a CIA deeply reluctant, yet nevertheless obligated, to follow White House orders. It shows the limitations of covert, CIA-assisted regime change schemes, particularly when they are not aligned with larger US foreign policy objectives. And it provides new insights into how a second Trump administration—or a Harris presidency—might still try to dislodge the Venezuelan strongman, whose latest sham reelection in July 2024 has again thrust his country into chaos.

The details of that covert CIA-assisted campaign, told exclusively to WIRED by eight Trump administration and former agency officials with knowledge of the anti-Maduro operation, are reported here for the first time.

...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (14 children)

Weird to attribute this to Trump instead of America, regime change in Latin America has always been bipartisan.

I didn't see any democrats opposing the sanctions, withholding of Venezuelan gold reserves, or funding of insurgents. I haven't seen Biden reverse any of Trump's policies.

Edit: Why is this getting downvoted? Are there people who think imperialism in Latin American is a partisan issue?

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 22 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (8 children)

The nuance is that American policy since the end of the cold war has been to use soft power to promote democracy. Offer pro-democracy propaganda to oppressed people, and sanction human rights violators. There is no evidence of the US funding insurgents in South America, Ukraine, Russia, or the PRC post-Cold War.

In contrast, Trump ordered the CIA to return to cold-war era coups and just straight-up invade Venezuela.

The first one is admirable and how foreign policy should be conducted, the second one is dangerous and is how America is portrayed in Russian propaganda.

[–] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works -3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (6 children)

You've got to be kidding. Two Iraq wars and over a million dead is admirable soft powers to you?

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

The imperialists in the bush administrations were the exceptions. There was a clear difference in American foreign policy between Bush Jr. and Obama.

It is important to recognize that countries do not have a foreign policy, presidents do. We can only describe trends that the presidents tend to follow. Iraq was not some shadowy CIA cabal, it was George W. Bush and Dick Cheney who had power at the time. If you want to characterize US foreign policy by public polling for support in the war, it is very clear that public support for the Iraq war has evaporated since 2003, which is why the US didn't intervene in Syria and let Russia and the Kurds duke it out. Fatigue from the Iraq War has also been used by Trump and his supporters to limit military support to Ukraine, NATO, and Taiwan.

Also, the Gulf War is not a good comparison. The Gulf war was a UN-directed intervention in response to the invasion of Kuwait. It was not a invasion coup like 2003.

Relevant video essays regarding American foreign policy post Cold War and the Russian propaganda depicting the US as "coup happy imperialists":

https://youtu.be/FVmmASrAL-Q?t=1916

https://youtu.be/7OFyn_KSy80

[–] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The US didn't intervene in Syria?

And twelve years of administration out of 35 don't count because reasons? FFS

Jesus fuck you people are brainwashed.

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name -1 points 2 weeks ago

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_intervention_in_the_Syrian_civil_war

Obama did not do anything until the airstrikes against daesh, and even then it was very controversial for Obama in the US News. Less than 10000 us special forces have been in Syria, and Assad is still the dictator of Syria. Compare to the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, etc. where the US was in direct conflict with another state.

12 years of administrations don't count because they're not Biden, the current president. What the US does right now has nothing to do what it did in 2003. The US foreign policy cannot be 80 years of regime change in South America, because the current US regime didn't exist before 2021.

Its not brainwashing to defend peaceful democratic opposition to dictators. Who are you going to complain to about imperialism if the US and EU give up on democracy and everybody lives as serfs under the thumb of some warlord?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)