Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

AZJonnie

(2,643 posts)
8. Lack of profitability is one part, but there's also the fact that they don't trust Trump to shut his trap
Thu Dec 18, 2025, 04:04 AM
Thursday

about their offers to move into Venezuela if he takes care of the Maduro problem.

Unlike with Iraq, the public didn't recently suffer through a 9/11. Venezuela isn't largely populated by Muslims. And despite Trump's weak WMD bullshit, Fentanyl is not a WMD and anyone who's not swinging off Trump's sack will tell you that. And, with Iraq there was at least semi-credible threat of real WMD's (which most people knew was bullshit, but they *did* have some at one point, at least).

Trump has none of that to his advantage. Thus, if say Chevron were to tell agents of Trump that were ready to move in once Maduro is gone, and THEN Trump sent in the military, which for all they know, he might? Trump would probably tell the world "CHEVRON'S READY TO MOVE IN NOW!" because he's a dipshit and an asshole. That will make the entire world think Trump attacked Venezuela for the benefit of US oil companies, with NOOO viable excuses like 9/11, Muslims, Terrorists, WMD's, etc. No cover whatsoever.

The world would be furious at any oil company they find out colluded in advance with Trump on any strong military action against Venezuela. Apart from drone strikes on fishermen, I mean. And these oil execs know it.

If they were interested in setting up shop extracting the oil after regime change, they would logically calculate its much smarter to tell Trump "no thanks, buddy!" for now, keep their noses clean. Then after Trump does the deed, appear to be moving in as an "effect" of what Trump did, not a "cause".

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Trump administration aski...»Reply #8