Lone Candle
Champion of Truth
The claims that the US used a new secret sound weapon in Venezuela are not well sourced. It’s not clear if any actual Venezuelan guards made these claims. If they did, it’s possible they are making it up. Or, if they did, it’s possible they were hit by flashbangs, buzzing drones, and breaching explosions and just thought they were being hit by some new, hightech weapon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Elt2Zi4ENk4
How U.S Air Power Destroyed Maduro’s Air Defense
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6Ls6a5qlBc
“Most people see America as an experiment in classical liberalism, whereby the founders created a system of limited government, religious pluralism and liberty. Religious leaders are free to spread their message through the culture—but not to take control of the levers of power and base lawmaking on their sectarian Bible interpretations. The Constitution protects everyone’s natural rights, with its main purpose limiting the sphere of government—not implementing rules to assure proper religious observance.
There really is no other way to seriously read our Constitution, but many religious people still argue the founders were Christians who envisioned a Christian nation. Some of the founders were indeed devout Christians and these folks cherry-pick Christian quotations from them.
…
Christian nationalists often argue that America cannot survive as a multicultural, multi-religious nation. To which I’ll quote a 1788 rebuttal from George Washington: “I had always hoped that this land might become a safe and agreeable asylum to the virtuous and persecuted part of mankind, to whatever nation they might belong.” As we approach the 250th anniversary of our founding, Americans must not let Washington’s brilliant legacy and the nation’s ideals get hijacked”
https://reason.com/2025/12/25/christian-nationalism-is-a-threat-to-americas-founding-principles/
“The “law enforcement” rationale for Saturday’s attack on Venezuela is nevertheless both implausible and troubling. It offers an open-ended license for any president who wants to excise Congress from decisions about the use of military force, accelerating a trend that threatens to nullify its constitutional war powers.
…
A superseding indictment that the Justice Department recently unsealed, which updates an indictment that the first Trump administration obtained in 2020, charges Maduro and several other Venezuelan officials with conspiracies involving narcoterrorism, cocaine importation, and machine gun possession. But Trump’s commitment to holding foreign leaders accountable for drug trafficking is open to question.
Just a month before invading Venezuela to serve justice on Maduro, Trump granted a “full and complete pardon” to former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, who was convicted of similar charges in March 2024. Thanks to that act of clemency, Hernández served just 18 months of his 45-year sentence.
…
According to the Trump administration, the president has unbridled authority to decide when such extreme measures are appropriate. Since “this was a law enforcement operation” rather than “military strikes for military purposes,” Rubio told The Washington Post, the administration did not need to notify Congress, let alone consult with legislators or seek permission.
A president who wants to attack another country, in other words, does not need an imminent threat, a declaration of war, or even an authorization for the use of military force. All he needs is an indictment, which is convenient because grand juries almost always approve charges recommended by federal prosecutors.
…
We cannot blame Trump for coming up with this excuse, which President George H.W. Bush deployed against Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega without legal trouble or any serious political repercussions. Nor can we blame Trump for the legislative branch’s abdication of its responsibilities.”
https://reason.com/2026/01/07/the-law-enforcement-rationale-for-invading-venezuela-is-an-open-ended-license-for-war/
The attack on Venezuela seems to have used a cyber attack to take out the city’s electricity and over 150 aircraft. The US suppressed Venezuelan anti-air capability by suppressing and destroying them. Many military targets were struck, most by relatively small and targeted weapons, and most anti-air assets. There wasn’t an attempt to more broadly destroy Venezuela’s military capabilities. The US may have used new one-way attack drones that are cheaper than missiles.
This US operation represents what is possible, but also required luck. Shoulder fired anti-air rockets were launched, and one helicopter was hit in the leg three time and still managed to land the helicopter on the attack. If those hits hit the helicopter or person a little differently, the operation may have gone differently. The US may have had to send more waves, giving Venezuela more time to respond. Success was not inevitable.
The Maduro regime is not gone. The US took the leader, but the rest of the regime stayed in place.
The attack was not authorized by Congress, and therefore unconstitutional.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APmgHMDOObk
“Hours after the Senate voted to advance the war powers resolution rebuking the White House’s current and future actions in Venezuela, President Donald Trump placed “angry” calls to each of the five Republicans who crossed the aisle, according to people with knowledge of the calls.
Sens. Josh Hawley, R-Mo.; Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska; Rand Paul, R-Ky.; Susan Collins, R-Maine; and Todd Young, R-Ind., voted with Democrats to require the administration to get congressional approval for future military action in Venezuela.
Thursday’s vote was a procedural motion, and it advances the legislation to a full Senate vote that will require a simple majority.
Soon after the vote, Trump threatened each senator with primary challenges, vowing to unseat them, the people said.”
The first action in Venezuela already required Congressional authorization and was unconstitutional!
https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/trump-threatened-gop-senators-voted-215718084.html
“here’s the most important thing about free trade that Trump fails to grasp: It is voluntary and consensual.
Rolling into Greenland with guns blazing—or making enough threats that Denmark eventually hands the island over to avoid that possibility—is the exact opposite of that. Trump’s centralized, nationalistic view of the world has no room for individuals or their consent. What do the people of Greenland want? What do the people of Denmark want? Heck, most Americans are not very keen on the idea of their government seizing Greenland. It’s not quite accurate to say that no one wants this—some very powerful people unfortunately do—but this would be something that the U.S. government would be doing against the will of most of the individuals involved in the transaction. That should matter—a lot.
…
it is encouraging to see that the Trump administration is putting together an offer that will reportedly be presented directly to the semiautonomous government of Greenland. The Economist reports that the deal includes giving Greenland the same status as the Marshall Islands and some other small Pacific islands.
The people of Greenland have the right to vote on their own future. If Trump’s deal is accepted, then Denmark (and others) should stand aside. But it certainly seems like that deal would have had a better chance of being accepted without all the bellicosity that has gone along with it.
Again, one of the glorious things about free trade is that no one points a gun (or the whole U.S. military’s terrifying arsenal) at you to make a deal happen. Individuals buy and sell things when and how it makes sense for them to do it. Yes, it is impossible to apply that logic to every aspect of international geopolitics, but presidents ought to nudge the world toward more trade and less war whenever possible. Trump is doing the opposite.”
https://reason.com/2026/01/06/trump-wants-to-seize-greenland-because-he-doesnt-understand-trade/?itm_source=parsely-api
Operation Absolute Resolve: How the U.S. Took Maduro
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmkMyWHAHdY
It’s not clear how long Venezuela will remain stable. There is a careful political balance to maintain stability. It’s also not clear how long the powers in Venezuela will put up with the US domineering over them. The US can destroy shit, but the Venezuelans can release chaos within Venezuela. Gangs in Venezuela are very powerful. The Venezuelan military doesn’t fully control the country.
Oil companies don’t want to invest in a country that requires huge investment and may not be stable, so their investment will likely need to be subsidized by the taxpayer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bj-5HRefix8
“I think we’re in a situation where we have not gotten regime change. The same group, minus only Maduro, is still in power, and it’s not at all clear just how much intimidating force that we’ve really got.
There are pressure points. I think they’re in trouble on oil exports and so on. But what are China and Russia and Iran and Cuba going to do in the face of that, just sit back and watch it happen? So, I’m not at all sure what day-after planning there was, because I’m not sure we’re finished with the day yet.
…
Trump talked about getting the oil, and I think there would have been a legitimate argument that U.S. oil companies kind of get first dibs to come in — not that we would take it, but that we would get some preference in terms of the ability to present proposals — and we should, at a minimum, get some of that production and maybe a lot of it.
But that’s not how Trump looks at it. He just wants to take control of it, and that’s how he’s going to pay for the military force and sort of everything else he’s been promising.
I just think that’s the kind of limited vision he has. He focuses on what he thinks he understands, the tangible economic asset.
The idea that American oil companies are just lining up to go invest in Venezuela is just flatly wrong, and the idea that somehow there will be a quick transformation of the incredibly dilapidated Venezuelan oil infrastructure that’s going to suddenly turn the production back online is fantasy, too.
It’s going to take tens of billions of dollars over a sustained period of time before they get this thing back up and running the way it used to be.
…
I think we do have full authority under international law to go after Maduro because what we would consider the legitimate government today is the opposition, with Maduro having stolen both the 2018 and 2024 presidential elections.
When you basically go back to dealing with the old regime and undercut the legitimate government, you’re giving Russia and China the precedent that they don’t have.
There’s nobody in Ukraine calling for Russian intervention, and the government of Taiwan certainly isn’t calling for Chinese intervention.
So the Venezuelan case as it stands now is quite different from those, but that’s not the way Trump’s behaving, and it’s the mistakes he’s making today that lend greater credence to a Russian or a Chinese effort to say, well, we’re just doing what the U.S. did in Venezuela.
…
what if they decide they’re not going to do what we want six months from now? Where are we going to be at that point? And I don’t think Trump has addressed that.”
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/07/john-bolton-trump-actions-against-venezuela-00713284