Venezuela 2025

[mike]

[JohnH]

I guess one would have to define what "illegal" or "legal" means, but yes, Venezeuala's government under the Chávez regime simply seized a bunch of American-owned property.

At some point, it's hard to see much wrong with America going and seizing it back.

[JohnH]

As quite a few have pointed out, this is really about pressure on Russia (and Russia laundering its oil via Venezuela).



It looks like the Russians have decided to abandoned this approach, in no doubt partly due to the tanker seizure. For those who are claiming it's wrong, I'd love to hear an explanation of what you think America should do with seized Russian oil in a Russian tanker.

[JimFoxvog]

I guess one would have to define what "illegal" or "legal" means, but yes, Venezeuala's government under the Chávez regime simply seized a bunch of American-owned property.

At some point, it's hard to see much wrong with America going and seizing it back.

Native Americans could say the same in the USA.

[Soloist]

I guess one would have to define what "illegal" or "legal" means, but yes, Venezeuala's government under the Chávez regime simply seized a bunch of American-owned property.

At some point, it's hard to see much wrong with America going and seizing it back.

Native Americans could say the same in the USA.

When someone stands up and forces America to follow the treaties they made years ago and broke repeatedly, I won’t stand in their way, but I really doubt it ever will happen.

[temporal1]

I guess one would have to define what "illegal" or "legal" means, but yes, Venezeuala's government under the Chávez regime simply seized a bunch of American-owned property.

At some point, it's hard to see much wrong with America going and seizing it back.

Native Americans could say the same in the USA.

When someone stands up and forces America to follow the treaties they made years ago and broke repeatedly, I won’t stand in their way, but I really doubt it ever will happen.

IF/THEN
IF a date in history is determined to be “The Correct Date” for nations+national borders to be deemed correct,
example, 1492 or any other, THEN, ok, on a global basis, restore all nations to that date. The U.S. founding is not particularly unique in world history. Men battle over borders.

“Men battle.” is a complete sentence.

In my view, that would be quite an an interesting exercise. Why cherry-pick one nation of so many?

.. “but i really doubt it it ever will happen.” i don’t believe it’s God’s plan, either. [Yes. He has Plans.]

[barnhart]

Native Americans could say the same in the USA.

When someone stands up and forces America to follow the treaties they made years ago and broke repeatedly, I won’t stand in their way, but I really doubt it ever will happen.

IF/THEN
IF a date in history is determined to be “The Correct Date” for nations+national borders to be deemed correct,
example, 1492 or any other, THEN, ok, on a global basis, restore all nations to that date. The U.S. founding is not particularly unique in world history. Men battle over borders.

“Men battle.” is a complete sentence.

In my view, that would be quite an an interesting exercise. Why cherry-pick one nation of so many?

.. “but i really doubt it it ever will happen.” i don’t believe it’s God’s plan, either. [Yes. He has Plans.]

How about simply applying ethics to the nation and time you are in rather than deflecting to other times and places.

[mike]

I guess one would have to define what "illegal" or "legal" means, but yes, Venezeuala's government under the Chávez regime simply seized a bunch of American-owned property.

At some point, it's hard to see much wrong with America going and seizing it back.

Native Americans could say the same in the USA.

When someone stands up and forces America to follow the treaties they made years ago and broke repeatedly, I won’t stand in their way, but I really doubt it ever will happen.

And someone would first have to trace the pre-European history of the Americas and find out which land claims by which Native Americans are legitimate, and which represent claims similar to that of the United States - claims based on having taken land from others in the past.

It is as if some people believe all existing land claims are (or at some point in the past were) legitimate, and all new ones are illegitimate. I don't think it is that simple; reality (the way of the world) simply does not work this way. As Anabaptists, we believe in not giving our allegiance to any of these earthly kingdoms, who operate by principles antithetical to that of Jesus.

[temporal1]

When someone stands up and forces America to follow the treaties they made years ago and broke repeatedly, I won’t stand in their way, but I really doubt it ever will happen.

IF/THEN
IF a date in history is determined to be “The Correct Date” for nations+national borders to be deemed correct,
example, 1492 or any other, THEN, ok, on a global basis, restore all nations to that date. The U.S. founding is not particularly unique in world history. Men battle over borders.

“Men battle.” is a complete sentence.

In my view, that would be quite an an interesting exercise. Why cherry-pick one nation of so many?

.. “but i really doubt it it ever will happen.” i don’t believe it’s God’s plan, either. [Yes. He has Plans.]

How about simply applying ethics to the nation and time you are in rather than deflecting to other times and places.

When the sense is remarks are not made in good faith, seeking broader context makes a lot of sense.
“Gotcha” statements are not made in good faith. And have become tiresome.

This particular gotcha argument is ironic, it implies the U.S. is “something special” among nations, something many vehemently oppose. Personally, i find every nation unique, and interesting, in its own way; i appreciate Thomas Sowell’s work, where he consistently strives to assess the U.S. in context of world history, rather than as something so very special, it deserves continual special attention.

[Soloist]

And someone would first have to trace the pre-European history of the Americas and find out which land claims by which Native Americans are legitimate, and which represent claims similar to that of the United States - claims based on having taken land from others in the past.

It is as if some people believe all existing land claims are (or at some point in the past were) legitimate, and all new ones are illegitimate. I don't think it is that simple; reality (the way of the world) simply does not work this way. As Anabaptists, we believe in not giving our allegiance to any of these earthly kingdoms, who operate by principles antithetical to that of Jesus.

99% of my position is really just pointing out the reality of American exceptionalism or honor is propaganda and our country acts exactly like any other major power.