briar patch

[Soloist]

Here's where I disagree: I think the United States had been winning in the global economy. Our allies believed we were making them a much better deal than China and Russia do. The dollar was at the heart of the global economy, and so were the systems we set up.

Does this disagree though with what Soloist says? I think this can still agree.

I'm not sure.

Soloist?

I'm sorry, you can engage with me further in the briar patch. I don't see a point in restating reported messages.

[Bootstrap]

Does this disagree though with what Soloist says? I think this can still agree.

I'm not sure.

Soloist?

I'm sorry, you can engage with me further in the briar patch. I don't see a point in restating reported messages.

OK. I will just continue to fail to grasp what you have said until you explain it here.

But I really would like to know where we agree and disagree.

[Soloist]

I'm not sure.

Soloist?

I'm sorry, you can engage with me further in the briar patch. I don't see a point in restating reported messages.

OK. I will just continue to fail to grasp what you have said until you explain it here.

But I really would like to know where we agree and disagree.

Then ask over where my messages got removed to. Obviously it got removed for a reason which I can only guess at but I don't see a point in stating what I already wrote again just to have it get reported and moved again.

[Bootstrap]

But I really would like to know where we agree and disagree.

Then ask over where my messages got removed to. Obviously it got removed for a reason which I can only guess at but I don't see a point in stating what I already wrote again just to have it get reported and moved again.

I did not report the messages, but I think the moderators did well to move them.

I would like to discuss the subject, simply and directly, without all that garbage. I bet a simple, direct response to the question would stay here, there would be no reason to move it. I would rather not keep wading through the junk in the briar patch.

I can't force you to answer, of course. But I would be interested in your answer if you choose to provide it.

[Soloist]

But I really would like to know where we agree and disagree.

Then ask over where my messages got removed to. Obviously it got removed for a reason which I can only guess at but I don't see a point in stating what I already wrote again just to have it get reported and moved again.

I did not report the messages, but I think the moderators did well to move them.

I would like to discuss the subject, simply and directly, without all that garbage. I bet a simple, direct response to the question would stay here, there would be no reason to move it. I would rather not keep wading through the junk in the briar patch.

I can't force you to answer, of course. But I would be interested in your answer if you choose to provide it.

You have my answer already. You can engage or not engage. That’s your choice.

[JohnH]

It was the Trump Administration that initially pushed Venezuela out of the American market and into the arms of Russia and China, starting in 2017

Starting? I know I always criticise AI, but here's an AI summary:

]Venezuela came under targeted U.S. sanctions starting in 2014-2015 with the Venezuela Defense of Human Rights and Civil Society Act (2014) and Presidential Executive Order 13692 (2015), initially targeting individuals for human rights abuses and corruption, with broader financial and oil sector sanctions expanding significantly under the Trump administration from 2017-2019, impacting the government and state-owned oil company (PDVSA).

Wouldn't this be more accurate?

It was the Obama Administration that initially pushed Venezuela out of the American market and into the arms of Russia and China, starting in 2014

Anyway, going on.

with sanctions that restricted Venezuela's ability to issue new debt or restructure existing debt. The United States had been Venezuela's largest export market, the United States halted Venezuelan oil imports to the United States market. The Venezuela government was also shut off from the dollar system.

In 2020, these sanctions were explicitly presented as leverage for regime change.

... so was the groundwork laid for this in 2014?

The 2014 law provided the foundation for broader sanctions, including those in 2015 that declared Venezuela a national security threat.

So what did we get out of that? Maduro stayed in power. Venezuela kept selling oil, turning to China, Russia, Iran, Turkey, and illegal networks to sell their oil and get financing. Russia and China gained influence in the Venezuelan government.

Interesting. So you're against sanctions?

Would you support repealing the sanctions against Russia, then?

From 2021-2023, the Biden Administration was maintaining the Trump sanctions, but generally easing them. In 2024, Maduro blocked opposition candidates and undermined the elections, and Biden re-imposed the Trump sanctions - these were not new sanctions, they were the same Trump sanctions that Biden had been loosening. I think this made the United States look like an unreliable long-term partner to Venezuela. So Venezuela doubled down on China and Russia.

Are you sure you don't mean the "Obama sanctions"? Why the term "Trump sanctions"? It sounds, instead, like sanctions against Venezuela are a consistent policy of the United States, continuing through uninterrupted under Obama, Trump, Biden, and then Trump again.

Venezuela is one of the poorest and weakest countries in South America. It has no blue-water navy, no real military to speak of, and no ability to threaten the United States in any meaningful way. It wasn’t an enemy state, it had been an economic partner. The same is still true of Colombia, which is a U.S. ally, though we seem determined to bully them too.

So what exactly was the point?

What did the United States gain by using the full weight of the world’s largest military and financial system to crush Venezuela economically? Maduro stayed in power. Venezuela kept selling oil, just not to us. We lost influence and access, while Russia and China gained both.

f the goal was to show that the United States is strong, all we really demonstrated is that we can bully weak countries. But we still failed to get anything of real value out of doing that.

That doesn’t look like strategy. It looks like performative toughness that backfires. Ooooh, look, we are bigger and tougher than one of the poorest and weakest countries in the world!

Okay, so did you level these complaints (a) against Obama in 2014/2015, and (b) against Biden from 2020-2024?

[Southerner]

It was the Trump Administration that initially pushed Venezuela out of the American market and into the arms of Russia and China, starting in 2017

Starting? I know I always criticise AI, but here's an AI summary:

]Venezuela came under targeted U.S. sanctions starting in 2014-2015 with the Venezuela Defense of Human Rights and Civil Society Act (2014) and Presidential Executive Order 13692 (2015), initially targeting individuals for human rights abuses and corruption, with broader financial and oil sector sanctions expanding significantly under the Trump administration from 2017-2019, impacting the government and state-owned oil company (PDVSA).

Wouldn't this be more accurate?

It was the Obama Administration that initially pushed Venezuela out of the American market and into the arms of Russia and China, starting in 2014

Anyway, going on.

with sanctions that restricted Venezuela's ability to issue new debt or restructure existing debt. The United States had been Venezuela's largest export market, the United States halted Venezuelan oil imports to the United States market. The Venezuela government was also shut off from the dollar system.

In 2020, these sanctions were explicitly presented as leverage for regime change.

... so was the groundwork laid for this in 2014?

The 2014 law provided the foundation for broader sanctions, including those in 2015 that declared Venezuela a national security threat.

So what did we get out of that? Maduro stayed in power. Venezuela kept selling oil, turning to China, Russia, Iran, Turkey, and illegal networks to sell their oil and get financing. Russia and China gained influence in the Venezuelan government.

Interesting. So you're against sanctions?

Would you support repealing the sanctions against Russia, then?

From 2021-2023, the Biden Administration was maintaining the Trump sanctions, but generally easing them. In 2024, Maduro blocked opposition candidates and undermined the elections, and Biden re-imposed the Trump sanctions - these were not new sanctions, they were the same Trump sanctions that Biden had been loosening. I think this made the United States look like an unreliable long-term partner to Venezuela. So Venezuela doubled down on China and Russia.

Are you sure you don't mean the "Obama sanctions"? Why the term "Trump sanctions"? It sounds, instead, like sanctions against Venezuela are a consistent policy of the United States, continuing through uninterrupted under Obama, Trump, Biden, and then Trump again.

Venezuela is one of the poorest and weakest countries in South America. It has no blue-water navy, no real military to speak of, and no ability to threaten the United States in any meaningful way. It wasn’t an enemy state, it had been an economic partner. The same is still true of Colombia, which is a U.S. ally, though we seem determined to bully them too.

So what exactly was the point?

What did the United States gain by using the full weight of the world’s largest military and financial system to crush Venezuela economically? Maduro stayed in power. Venezuela kept selling oil, just not to us. We lost influence and access, while Russia and China gained both.

f the goal was to show that the United States is strong, all we really demonstrated is that we can bully weak countries. But we still failed to get anything of real value out of doing that.

That doesn’t look like strategy. It looks like performative toughness that backfires. Ooooh, look, we are bigger and tougher than one of the poorest and weakest countries in the world!

Okay, so did you level these complaints (a) against Obama in 2014/2015, and (b) against Biden from 2020-2024?

Any reason this is not in the Politics subforum?

And AI responses??? Making it one of my New Year's resolutions to not post AI stuff.

[Soloist]

Any reason this is not in the Politics subforum?

And AI responses??? Making it one of my New Year's resolutions to not post AI stuff.

my intention was to be focused on the history, but it does seem like at this point its just a debate if President Trump was at fault for a policy choice or if its a historical pattern, which certainly was never my intention.

[JohnH]

Any reason this is not in the Politics subforum?

And AI responses??? Making it one of my New Year's resolutions to not post AI stuff.

Several other posters in this forum have made it clear they plan to continue to discuss politics in multiple non-political subforums. So be it.

[temporal1]

Any reason this is not in the Politics subforum?

And AI responses??? Making it one of my New Year's resolutions to not post AI stuff.

Several other posters in this forum have made it clear they plan to continue to discuss politics in multiple non-political subforums. So be it.

It’s reasonable to not presume every mention of Trump’s name is political. (The politics subforum isn’t labeled The Trump Category.)

True, not all may be capable of differentiating.
Probably worth the effort.