The United States is the world leader in regime change, toppling 35 foreign heads over the past 120 years, by one reckoning. It’s a record built on a dangerous combination of unparalleled military might, a large group of perceived enemies—and a sunny self-confidence that has repeatedly proven mistaken.
Now, Washington has led a military and covert campaign targeting President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela, after already striking Iran and Yemen and issuing other, vaguer threats against Nigeria, Mexico, Panama, and even Denmark and Canada.
Regime change and other strong-arm interventions rarely go as planned. But past failures should remind Americans of how catastrophic the consequences of hubris can be—both on an individual human scale and a national one. Take the U.S.-orchestrated regime change in Iraq:
Three years after the United States forced out Saddam Hussein based on false claims about weapons of mass destruction, there was no sign of the wave of democratization that President George W. Bush’s team had promised would follow in the Middle East. Long after, the consequences are still cascading for ordinary Iraqis.
Ellen Knickmeyer, a former West Africa bureau chief for the Associated Press and a former Baghdad bureau chief for the Washington Post, argues that Venezuela is a return to a long U.S. tradition of regional interference.
This-Lengthiness-479 on
The only metric that matters is „Does America benefit from this regime change?“
The consequences of failure aren’t typically borne by the USA. If the target country goes to ****, that’s unfortunate. But that’s not nearly enough to counterbalance the potential benefits of success (for the USA).
Honestly, the rhetoric of regime change for the good of the poor oppressed peoples is so laughable at this point, I’m genuinely amazed any Americans still fall for it.
ApostleofV8 on
Nonsense, The Venezuelans would probably name a square after Trump or Rubio/s
Well, jokes aside, as long as oil profit keeps going to Trump’s donors and backers in the oil industry, no one cares what happens to average Venezuelans.
Link50L on
As we have seen recently, the USA cannot even change it’s *own* regime without making it a disaster. Good luck to Venezuela.
Conversely, two wrongs do not make a right, and the precedent here is that the USA frequently makes things much worse my meddling in the internal affairs of other countries. And there is no legal „right“ that I am aware of that endorses these types of actions by the USA.
Ultimately, I just see this as a USA endorsement of „might makes right“. Which is a sad state of affairs for our planet.
Ooofy_Doofy_ on
Regime change failed because of Islam. Of course it’s politically incorrect to say that. Comparing Iraq to Venezuela is ridiculous.
Normal_Imagination54 on
So are we going to pretend now that US cares about the aftermath of regime change?
Come on now. Do these guys get paid to shill this nonsense?
MultipolarityEnjoyer on
Yanks and disdain for others sovereignty… a tale as old as the usa itself… “rules based order” lol nasty
Heiminator on
Greets from a (west) German: The Americans did a pretty good job at nation building around here. Same goes for Japan.
Illustrious_Comb5993 on
The world is better today because of the US actions.
Now its up to the Venezuelan people
Leave A Reply
Du musst angemeldet sein, um einen Kommentar abzugeben.
9 Kommentare
The United States is the world leader in regime change, toppling 35 foreign heads over the past 120 years, by one reckoning. It’s a record built on a dangerous combination of unparalleled military might, a large group of perceived enemies—and a sunny self-confidence that has repeatedly proven mistaken.
Now, Washington has led a military and covert campaign targeting President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela, after already striking Iran and Yemen and issuing other, vaguer threats against Nigeria, Mexico, Panama, and even Denmark and Canada.
Regime change and other strong-arm interventions rarely go as planned. But past failures should remind Americans of how catastrophic the consequences of hubris can be—both on an individual human scale and a national one. Take the U.S.-orchestrated regime change in Iraq:
Three years after the United States forced out Saddam Hussein based on false claims about weapons of mass destruction, there was no sign of the wave of democratization that President George W. Bush’s team had promised would follow in the Middle East. Long after, the consequences are still cascading for ordinary Iraqis.
Ellen Knickmeyer, a former West Africa bureau chief for the Associated Press and a former Baghdad bureau chief for the Washington Post, argues that Venezuela is a return to a long U.S. tradition of regional interference.
The only metric that matters is „Does America benefit from this regime change?“
The consequences of failure aren’t typically borne by the USA. If the target country goes to ****, that’s unfortunate. But that’s not nearly enough to counterbalance the potential benefits of success (for the USA).
Honestly, the rhetoric of regime change for the good of the poor oppressed peoples is so laughable at this point, I’m genuinely amazed any Americans still fall for it.
Nonsense, The Venezuelans would probably name a square after Trump or Rubio/s
Well, jokes aside, as long as oil profit keeps going to Trump’s donors and backers in the oil industry, no one cares what happens to average Venezuelans.
As we have seen recently, the USA cannot even change it’s *own* regime without making it a disaster. Good luck to Venezuela.
That aside, I’m really torn on this newest extraordinary rendition (and I should note, I’ll be forthright about my relative ignorance of Venezuelan affairs). That said, Maduro was considered an illegitimate leader by [a considerable portion of the world](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_reactions_to_the_2024_Venezuelan_presidential_election), and so, good on you USA.
Conversely, two wrongs do not make a right, and the precedent here is that the USA frequently makes things much worse my meddling in the internal affairs of other countries. And there is no legal „right“ that I am aware of that endorses these types of actions by the USA.
Ultimately, I just see this as a USA endorsement of „might makes right“. Which is a sad state of affairs for our planet.
Regime change failed because of Islam. Of course it’s politically incorrect to say that. Comparing Iraq to Venezuela is ridiculous.
So are we going to pretend now that US cares about the aftermath of regime change?
Come on now. Do these guys get paid to shill this nonsense?
Yanks and disdain for others sovereignty… a tale as old as the usa itself… “rules based order” lol nasty
Greets from a (west) German: The Americans did a pretty good job at nation building around here. Same goes for Japan.
The world is better today because of the US actions.
Now its up to the Venezuelan people