president Maduro captured after US strikes

[DBCowboy]

Saddam was a dictator. Gidaffi was a dictator.

People didn’t protest our involvement in toppling those regimes because they were sympathetic to them. They protested whether it was our place to use our resources and geopolitical capital to make it happen.

This is no different.

I don't believe that.

I honestly believe that there are people who would be happier if Maduro was still in control.

This gives "socialism" a bad look for those who are protesting.

But Maduro is the example of socialism/communism.

[CriticalStinker]

I don't believe that.

I honestly believe that there are people who would be happier if Maduro was still in control.

This gives "socialism" a bad look for those who are protesting.

But Maduro is the example of socialism/communism.

There’s been a massive anti war sentiment in both sides of politics since Iraq. 

Maybe there are some people who want to save face for socialism, but I think it’s more likely most of the people critical of this are just tired of the US getting involved with other countries.

Trump ran on no new wars, and ending US regime change. There was clearly an appetite for it, even on the right.

[DBCowboy]

There’s been a massive anti war sentiment in both sides of politics since Iraq. 

Maybe there are some people who want to save face for socialism, but I think it’s more likely most of the people critical of this are just tired of the US getting involved with other countries.

Trump ran on no new wars, and ending US regime change. There was clearly an appetite for it, even on the right.

The people here and IRL are hiding their defense of communism by being "against the process" of what Trump did.

Just my opinion.

[quintessentone]

The people here and IRL are hiding their defense of communism by being "against the process" of what Trump did.

Just my opinion.

Perhaps you need to change your programming and the word 'communism' to 'social democracy' to get a better handle on what other people IRL are actually saying.

[UltraBudgie]

that is true. most of the people db calls communists are actually democrats.

[DBCowboy]

Perhaps you need to change your programming and the word 'communism' to 'social democracy' to get a better handle on what other people IRL are actually saying.

You can change the word, but the meaning still remains the same.

Or as the great bard once said . . . .

"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet"
-Tay Tay

[DBCowboy]

that is true. most of the people db calls communists are actually democrats.

Most people who call themselves democrats are actually communists.

[CriticalStinker]

The people here and IRL are hiding their defense of communism by being "against the process" of what Trump did.

Just my opinion.

And people who were anti Iraq were unpatriotic, terrorist sympathizers, or supporters of Saddam.

I don’t think this has much to do with Trump, or what “he did”. This is just standard US foreign policy as of the last few decades. There have been many pushing for this on both sides in the establishment. The donor class pushed for this and got it, congrats to them, they won. Lindsay Graham is doing his celebration tour right now along side the admin. They delivered for their real constituents.

There are dictatorships all around the globe, over 50 of them. Some of them we directly support and even helped get them to power or keep them there. I think reducing people’s criticism and skepticism of the cherry picked targets to actual support of dictatorships is a logical fallacy. The US government directly supports dictatorships, so how is there some moral high ground where supporters of this policy get to tell dissidents this is altruism, and any questioning of the policy is communist support?

Where was the conversation over a year ago from voters demanding something be done in Venezuela? That’s rhetorical, it didn’t exist. This wasn’t a big issue for voters, they didn’t want it. So simply saying that anyone critical of it somehow had some huge vested interest in communism for an obscure Latin American country just doesn’t make sense to me.

[Sky727]

I don't believe that.

I honestly believe that there are people who would be happier if Maduro was still in control.

This gives "socialism" a bad look for those who are protesting.

But Maduro is the example of socialism/communism.

You left off hard core drug running cartel mafia  bastard..

[DBCowboy]

And people who were anti Iraq were unpatriotic, terrorist sympathizers, or supporters of Saddam.

I don’t think this has much to do with Trump, or what “he did”. This is just standard US foreign policy as of the last few decades. There have been many pushing for this on both sides in the establishment. The donor class pushed for this and got it, congrats to them, they won. Lindsay Graham is doing his celebration tour right now along side the admin. They delivered for their real constituents.

There are dictatorships all around the globe, over 50 of them. Some of them we directly support and even helped get them to power or keep them there. I think reducing people’s criticism and skepticism of the cherry picked targets to actual support of dictatorships is a logical fallacy. The US government directly supports dictatorships, so how is there some moral high ground where supporters of this policy get to tell dissidents this is altruism, and any questioning of the policy is communist support?

Where was the conversation over a year ago from voters demanding something be done in Venezuela? That’s rhetorical, it didn’t exist. This wasn’t a big issue for voters, they didn’t want it. So simply saying that anyone critical of it somehow had some huge vested interest in communism for an obscure Latin American country just doesn’t make sense to me.

I was against the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, but I still served.

If Venezuela is a nothing-burger, then why the cry and protests?