
sherpa
Community Member-
Posts
3,658 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by sherpa
-
I have no interest in her gender or her race, or the potential Jewish faith of a potential running mate. I will not vote for her because she is the single worst candidate for president I have ever seen. Nothing credible on her resume. Anti energy. Anti business. Anti Israel. Border is on her resume. No credibility in international issues. Absolutely clueless re the military. Total sum is that she is a typical San Francisco Dem., and that is a losing background.
-
Mossad has much more capability and success in human intel in the middle east. The US relies on signal intel as we don't have near the capability on the ground, because we can't get anybody to live there and develop connections. Mossad is much more motivated, in my view, because they know they are threatened with destruction every day. The US doesn't have that capability or motivation, and is not as effective.
-
We had a financial crisis based on mortgage failures, and complete distrust in the value of securities relating to that. We don't have that now.
-
Charity should not be suicide. It is Christian and honorable to take care of people who are in immediate need. It is as important to demand that the countries they live in are responsible enough to not force them to emigrate. It is not sustainable or desirable to allow an escape path for a failed government. These things need to be fixed internally.
-
It did not go over my head. Absent an internal revolt, which has been tried and never gathered the momentum necessary to bring it home, regime change will not happen. The US has supported at least three opposition candidates. They have never gotten the necessary traction to take the thing over the top. It is up to the Venezuelan people to decide that enough is enough. What they need is a leader to focus on. The US would support that in a minute. It would be stupid, wasteful and in the long term, destructive to both sides for a direct US intervention. The ball is in the Venezuelan opposition court. So far, they haven't gotten over the hump.
-
Been there about 30 times. Seen it up front and through the eyes of our people who lived there. Probably doesn't satisfy your standards, but I'm quite OK with that limitation. Have you been there? Know anybody who lives there? Talked to anybody at the US diplomatic mission assigned there? When you have, we can have an informed discussion. Toll then, you're an uniuformed ass.
-
I'm not sure what your point is, but the US has no interest in limiting Venezuelan exports, nor in expending US military force to end the regime. What I do know, as someone who follows the oil industry, is that their numbers are grossly inflated. Same as their economic data, which they gave up reporting as it was universally regarded as fictional. I spent a fair amount of time there during the Chavez regime, and the initial part of Maduro, and saw it up front. Simply pathetic, but at times funny, at least the Chavez stuff. Funniest nonsense on billboards and TV that I've ever witnessed. I am quite familiar with their gov's pilferage of foreign monetary assets, their courting of Tehran, their supporting of Havana, and their attempt to undermine democratic reform in Colombia and other South American countries, who eventually dis-invited them. I am also aware of US military monitoring of their goings on from friends who were involved.
-
Now I'm really sure I don't know what you suggest. Who is crossing another border? Venezuela's petro industry is destroyed. They have plenty or resources internally that they are unable to develop without Guyana. Further, Maduro didn't intentionally tank the Venezuelan economy. Chavez appointed his cronies to run it and they failed miserably, as socialists running businesses always do. Whatever, this is on the Venezuelan population. No reason to expend UDS blood or sweat, other than not letting their refugees in. They choose to live under this regime. Not the US' responsibility to bail them out for that choice.
-
I give you the benefit of the doubt because I think you are an honest, thoughtful poster. But to claim Bush? Nonsense. Explain. There seems to be a theme underpinning what you have posted in this thread that I think is erroneous. We would be stupid, and it would be wrong, to intervene militarily in the affairs of other countries unless they threaten us. Nor do we have the assets to defend the Western Pacific, Red Sea, Persian Gulf, and Med, and then do something in South America. We don't "need" to do anything about Venezuela. We simply need to develop our energy resources to limit whatever limited influence they have, and police our borders so that folks opposed to that wacky regime don't have an easy out, and eventually do something internally.
-
I'm not a big fan of credibility of this kind of news, but if this is true, and the Iranian military does anything, this would give the Israelis full cover to go after the Iranian nuc program. I'm quite certain they know the targets, and equally certain they seek a justification. I'm quite certain the US would be better at it, but if Iran acts, this is the excuse nonpareil for the Israelis to do what they want to do. Not sure they have the range, and not sure they have the weapons, but if Iran does anything, we may find out.
-
Why bother? They are no threat to us. Further, we don't have the assets to do this with other commitments. Look at the geography. There is no land that we have bases on. I suppose we could pressure the Colombians to host a force, but that's not realistic, so it would have to be Naval. Look how stretched the Navy is. They just had to redeploy Roosevelt from its westpac area in order to replace Eisenhower in the Red Sea, which was extended twice, (a very bad situation). The suggested relief is Truman, which is in early stages of workups and rumored to be rushed to deploy. The middle east has the potential to go south any day, and we don't have enough to take on both issues. Point....We don't have enough "stuff" to do this, and Venezuela isn't any real threat. Point two. Not a great idea to use military force unless absolutely necessary. Bad message. Point three. We don't have the leadership to sell it. Biden is toast. Harris, I'm sure, is completely unaware. Venezuela is failing on its own. We don't need to take on a non threat.
-
I'm not saying get rid of them, I'm saying stop allowing them in. Typically, they have gone to Colombia or Brasil, but those countries have bee a bit more successful than our current administration in shutting the door, which is the key. Either way, as it stands now, external force is a silly idea. It has to be internal, and they have the critical mass to do it, they just need a leader.
-
I'm unaware or any Cuban opposition leader of any significance. Maybe you are. The Venezuelans at this point, are much more nationalistic than the Cubans, whom they use as examples of political catastrophe, as did every other South American country when Chavez launched his grossly failed "Bolivarian Revolution" across South America. Rejected on its face, and Cuba was always the example.
-
No. Have the displaced, influential Venezuelans form their own opposition group, with a real leader at the front. They haven't. Considering "more aggressive options" is a mistake. Above, you suggested a blockade of oil shipments. That is not only an act of war, but is unnecessary. What we need to do is deny entry, and that might motivate them to fix their own problem, which they have created and put up with since early Chavez. They need a focal point leader. The Maduro regime's control is not strong.
-
I am quite certain we have never used military options there. 100% certain. The first step is to control our border and not an allow an easy out to their refugees. This administration has not done that. Second, there a tens of thousands of displaced Venezuelans in South Florida, and a number of them are influential and probably want to return. Empower them to tip the scale against a weakly controlled military and police, and Maduro and his group would be run out. He is vastly unsupported, but he controls the bb's. Unfortunately, we don't have that leadership.
-
We leave it alone. It is up to their people to remove Maduro. We offer them support, and acknowledge that if they do it and elect a truly democratic gov we will restore relations. Their oil industry is in shambles. It has always been a bad choice anyway, very high sulfur content and tough to refine, commanding below market prices. Revolts are best done internally, and that's what needs to happen. What is incredibly stupid, and what is suggested above, is making this an internal US political issue. Venezuelans get what they deserve, and their actions determine that. I believe their military would turn rather quickly, and if that happened, their police would follow and that would be it.
-
I have no interest in responding to this nonsense. Simply absurd. You ever been to Venezuela under Chavez or Maduro? Trump, or any other US political candidate in my lifetime is nothing like either of those. Still, attempts at changing the judicial is an eyebrow raiser. That's exactly what Chavez did.
-
You don't think Carter's Operation Eagle Claw was playing games for personal game? You will find great disagreement on that from the military if that is your view.
-
He grew up to be a copilot om the Asiana 777 that crashed in San Francisco. Tragic accident, but one of the funniest intern stunts.