Report: Trump Weighs Options for Launching a War With Venezuela

The Trump administration has developed a series of options for launching attacks on Venezuela, The New York Times reported on Tuesday, as the US continues its military buildup in the region.

The report said that one option would involve bombing Venezuelan military facilities with the goal of collapsing military support for Maduro in hopes that it would get the Venezuelan leader to flee. But critics of the approach argue that it would likely have the opposite effect, rallying the military around its embattled leader.

The second option would be to send special operations forces, such as Navy SEALs or the Army’s Delta Force, into Venezuela to kill or capture Maduro. Such an operation would put the US troops involved in the attack at serious risk since Maduro has the support of his military and a civilian militia that the Venezuelan government says has millions of members.

The third option would involve sending a much larger force into Venezuela to capture airfields and some of Venezuela’s infrastructure and oil fields. The Washington Examiner has reported that US military planners believe the forces in the region are now sufficient to seize and hold key strategic facilities such as ports and airfields on Venezuelan territory.

The Times report said that President Trump is reluctant to back an operation that would put US troops at risk or come with the chance of failure, and for that reason, other plans are being developed that would involve naval drones and long-range weapons. A decision isn’t expected until the aircraft carrier USS Gerald Ford, which just left the Mediterranean, arrives near Venezuela.

If Trump orders an attack on Venezuela, it would almost certainly lead to a full-blown war or a quick decapitation of the government, which would likely plunge the country into chaos. The Times report cited Trump aides who said far more planning has gone into striking at the Maduro government than on what it would take to govern Venezuela should the operation succeed.

Trump aides said that the president has expressed reservations about attacking Venezuela and that he’s asking what the US could get out of it, with a focus on Venezuela’s vast oil resources. The push to launch a war in Venezuela is being led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who also serves as Trump’s national security advisor, and Stephen Miller, the president’s chief domestic policy advisor.

Keep reading

Russia May Send Hypersonic Missiles to Venezuela as Defense Against Regime Change: ‘America May Be in For Some Surprises’

Russia has opened the door to supplying hypersonic missiles to Venezuela as a deterrent against a possible U.S. invasion.

Alexei Zhuravlyov, deputy chairman of Russia’s parliamentary defense committee, warned that “America may be in for some surprises” if it attempts to remove the Maduro dictatorship from power.

“I see no obstacles to supplying a friendly country with new developments such as the Oreshnik or, let’s say, the well-proven Kalibr missiles,” Zhuravlyov told the Russian news site Gazeta.Ru.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has claimed that the Oreshnik missiles possess such overwhelming power that launching several of them with conventional warheads would unleash destruction comparable to a nuclear strike.

The Oreshnik was first deployed in the eastern Ukrainian city of Dnipro in November 2024, in retaliation for Ukraine’s use of Western-supplied long-range weapons, including British and American Storm Shadow missiles, against targets inside Russia.

The warning comes after Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro pleaded for military assistance from both Moscow and Beijing amid reports that President Trump is planning an operation to remove him from power.

In his letter to the Kremlin, Maduro requested additional Sukhoi Su-30MK2 fighter jets, describing them as “the most important deterrent the Venezuelan national government had when facing the threat of war.”

Over the weekend, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said the Kremlin condemns “the use of excessive military force in carrying out anti-drug tasks.”

Keep reading

The Administration Just Admitted War Powers Don’t Cover Trump’s Caribbean Murder Spree

“A top Justice Department lawyer,” the Washington Post reports, “has told lawmakers that the Trump administration can continue its lethal strikes against alleged drug traffickers in Latin America — and is not bound by a decades-old law requiring Congress to give approval for ongoing hostilities.”

That law is the War Powers Resolution, which requires the president to inform Congress within 48 hours of commencing military hostilities, and to cease those operations within 60 days unless Congress authorizes their continuation.

The first admitted US military strike on a boat in the Caribbean occurred on September 4; under the War Powers Resolution those strikes (which have killed dozens) would necessarily end on November 4 unless Congress says “sure, keep on going.”

But it’s more complicated than that, and not just because White House Office of Legal Counsel chief T. Elliot Gaiser claims the War Powers Resolution only applies when US troops are “in harm’s way,” and that the drone strikes  in question pose no such danger.

The big issue with the War Powers Resolution is that it’s unconstitutional. Not for the reason most administrations claim — that it limits an imagined presidential power to wage war at will and on whim — but in the other direction.

The US Constitution assigns the power to declare war exclusively to Congress. Not after the president has done whatever he wants for 60 days, but from the very beginning. Aside from immediate defense against direct attack, a president waging war prior to or outside of a congressional declaration is an impeachable “high crime.”

Some argue that the passage of time and advancement of technology imply a necessary expansion of presidential war powers: He must be able to act in the moment and not wait around on a dawdling Congress. It’s actually the other way around.

In 1941, it took 29 hours and 30 minutes from the first explosions at Pearl Harbor for Congress to declare war on Japan. That was before members of Congress could hop on planes to return to Washington — or, for that matter, boot up their laptops for Zoom meetings.

Since Congress has used remote and proxy technology before (during COVID), the infrastructure is already there for Congress to act quickly if its members believe a war is called for. Absent something on the level of a nuclear holocaust, the president could receive full war authority within single-digit hours.

But let’s take Gaiser at his word for a moment: If the drone strike campaign in the Caribbean isn’t war, what is it?

Keep reading

US Bombs 16th Alleged Drug Boat in Latin America

The US has bombed another alleged drug-running boat in the waters of Latin America, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said on Saturday.

Hegseth said the vessel was targeted in the Caribbean and, as usual, he provided no evidence to back up his claims about what the boat was carrying. He said the bombing killed three “narco-terrorists,” a term the Trump administration is using to justify extra-judicial executions at sea for an alleged crime that doesn’t receive the death penalty in the US.

The attack brings the total number of boats the US has bombed since September 2 to 16, and the total number of people killed in the campaign to 64, according to numbers released by the Trump administration. Nine boats have been hit in the Caribbean, and seven were targeted in the Eastern Pacific.

While the Trump administration has claimed the boats that have been targeted were attempting to bring drugs to the US, a US official has told Drop Site News that many of the vessels that have been struck “do not even have the requisite gasoline or motor capacity to reach US waters.”

Trump officials have also framed the bombing campaign as a response to fentanyl-related deaths in the US, but the US official speaking to Drop Site also noted that little to no of the fentanyl in the US comes from Venezuela, where most of the boats targeted in the Caribbean have come from.

Keep reading

The Coming War with Venezuela

The Miami Herald reports that the president has decided to order attacks inside Venezuela:

The Trump Administration has made the decision to attack military installations inside Venezuela and the strikes could come at any moment, sources with knowledge of the situation told the Miami Herald, as the U.S. prepares to initiate the next stage of its campaign against the Soles drug cartel.

An attack on Venezuela is completely unjustified and illegal. The president has no authority to start a war with Venezuela. An American attack will be a flagrant violation of the U.N. Charter and international law. The U.S. will be committing criminal aggression against a neighbor on the dubious pretext of combating drug trafficking, but we all know the real goal is to attempt forcible regime change.

No one can be surprised by this news. We know that the administration has been preparing for an attack for months. There were already signs of a new illegal war on the horizon in August when the president ordered the military to use force against cartels. The subsequent military buildup in the Caribbean and the ensuing murder spree at sea confirmed that the U.S. was getting ready to strike. The deployment of the USS Gerald Ford to the region was further confirmation that they intended to escalate with attacks inside other countries.

The administration will probably restrict its intervention to a bombing campaign, but that is hardly good news. If the murder spree at sea is any indication of what to expect, attacks inside Venezuela will kill many civilians on purpose. Given Hegseth’s enthusiasm for “lethality” and war crimes, we should assume that the rules of engagement will be extremely loose. The coming war with Venezuela will likely get a lot of innocent Venezuelans killed.

The administration may hope that intervention will lead to a coup against Maduro, but that seems like a long shot. Venezuelan military leaders have had several opportunities to ditch Maduro before, and they have not done so. Maduro might try to ride out the bombing campaign. It is possible that he could even try turning the attack to his advantage if most Venezuelans respond to the attack on their country as people normally do by rallying behind their government.

Keep reading

Tulsi Gabbard Claims Trump Has Ended Regime Change Wars, Ignoring His Regime Change Wars In Iran and Venezuela.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard recently claimed that under the current Trump administration, America’s regime change wars are over.

At a Bahrain security summit, Gabbard said, “For decades, our foreign policy has been trapped in a counterproductive and endless cycle of regime change or nation building, It was a one-size-fits-all approach, of toppling regimes, trying to impose our system of governance on others, intervene in conflicts that were barely understood and walk away with more enemies than allies.”

Along with this, she implied that “America’s former strategy of ‘regime change or nation building’ had ended under President Donald Trump”.

The idea that America’s regime change policy has ended under Trump would be news to Iran and Venezuela, where Trump has attempted/is attempting to carry out regime change.

Last June, Trump joined in on Israel’s bombing of military infrastructure in Iran.

While the bombing was sold as an attempt to stop Iran from getting Nuclear Weapons, Trump’s own annual threat assessment report from the intelligence community from March of this year found no evidence Iran was building or planning on building a nuclear weapon, writing, “We continue to assess Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and that Khamenei has not reauthorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003” .

In a later interview with The Daily Caller, Trump admitted he carried out the Iran bombing for Israel, saying, “nobody has done more for Israel than I have, including the recent attacks with Iran”.

In a speech to the Israeli Knesset last month, Trump bragged about his Iran bombing, along with a list of other pro-Israel policies and went on to brag that his pro-Israel donor Miriam Adelson was, “responsible for so much”, adding, “I actually asked her once, I said, ‘So, Miriam, I know you love Israel. What do you love more, the United States or Israel?’ She refused to answer. That means, that might mean, Israel”.

As for Israel’s intention behind the Iran bombing, the Israeli paper Times of Israel reported that leaked Israeli transcripts during the bombing, “make it clear that Israel was also looking to destabilize the regime and even to kill Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei”.

The paper reported that, “Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said that Israel needed to ‘keep searching for the leader,’ referring to Khamenei, whom (Israeli defense minister Israel) Katz later said Jerusalem sought to kill”.

The paper reported that, “Netanyahu said entire Iranian neighborhoods and districts should be evacuated, and that Israel should work on destabilizing the Islamic regime”, quoting him saying, “if Khamenei reacts to an American strike, it could be the end of the regime”.

One Trump administration official told the Grayzone that “CIA Director John Ratcliffe and US CENTCOM Commander Gen. Michael Kurilla have become vehicles for Israel’s Mossad and military as they seek to manipulate the US into attacking Iran.” adding “During the Trump administration’s meetings with Israeli intelligence officials … Israelis have demonstrated a single-minded focus on regime change, clamoring for authorization to assassinate Iran’s leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei”.

The University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab uncovered that during the bombing, Israeli intelligence ran a propaganda campaign in Persian on social media, “promoting regime change in Iran.”

Keep reading

Maduro Urgently Seeks Military Aid From Russia & China With US Bulls-Eye On Venezuela

President Trump said on Friday that he’s yet to make a final decision on launching a military attack on Venezuela, but President Nicolás Maduro is not waiting around while taking the US leader’s word on it.

Maduro is reportedly urgently reaching out to Russia, China, and Iran for any possible military aid, including defense items which may have already been negotiated or are in the works. The Washington Post says it’s obtained internal documents showing such recent and high-stakes requests.

“Amid a buildup of American forces in the Caribbean, Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro is reaching out to Russia, China and Iran to enhance its worn military capabilities and solicit assistance, requesting defensive radarsaircraft repairs and potentially missiles, according to internal U.S. government documents obtained by The Washington Post,” the publication reports.

“The requests to Moscow were made in the form of a letter meant for Russian President Vladimir Putin and was intended to be delivered during a visit to the Russian capital by a senior aide this month,” WaPo continues.

And separately, Maduro is said to have sent a formal letter to Chinese President Xi Jinping seeking “expanded military cooperation” between the two countries in order to counter “the escalation between the U.S. and Venezuela.”

Maduro in it seeks to expedite Chinese companies’ production of radar detection systems based on prior deals, in cooperation between Caracas and Beijing which has long been an open secret.

“In the missive, Maduro emphasized the seriousness of perceived U.S. aggression in the Caribbean, framing U.S. military action against Venezuela as action against China due to their shared ideology,” the documents state according to the Post.

Keep reading

Congress Members Fuming, Left Unsatisfied By Classified Pentagon Briefing On Drug Boat Strikes

US War Department officials don’t know the identities of the 61 people who have been extra-judicially executed in US military strikes on boats in the waters near Venezuela and in the Eastern Pacific Ocean, Politico reported on Thursday, citing House Democrats who attended a classified briefing on the campaign.

“[The department officials] said that they do not need to positively identify individuals on these vessels to do the strikes, they just need to prove a connection to smuggling,” said Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-CA). “When we tried to get more information, we did not get satisfactory answers.”

While the Trump administration has cited overdose deaths in the US related to fentanyl to justify the bombing campaign, lawmakers were told in the briefing that the boats that have been targeted were allegedly smuggling cocaine, though the Pentagon has not provided evidence to back up its claims about what the vessels were carrying.

“They argued that cocaine is a facilitating drug of fentanyl, but that was not a satisfactory answer for most of us,” Jacobs said.

The briefing on Thursday came after the Pentagon shut out Democrats from another briefing it held with Republicans a day earlier, which left Democratic senators fuming. Democrats who attended Thursday’s briefing said Pentagon lawyers were pulled from the meeting at the last minute.

Am I leaving satisfied? Absolutely not. And the last word that I gave to the admiral was, ‘I hope you recognize the constitutional peril that you are in and the peril you are putting our troops in,’” Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA) told reporters after the briefing, according to CNN.

Jacobs said that, based on what she was told, even if Congress authorized the bombing campaign, it would still be illegal. “[T]here’s nothing that we heard in there that changes my assessment that this is completely illegal, that it is unlawful and even if Congress authorized it, it would still be illegal because there are extrajudicial killings where we have no evidence,” she said.

Criticism of the US bombing campaign has also come from Republicans, most prominently from Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY). “No one said their name, no one said what evidence, no one said whether they’re armed, and we’ve had no evidence presented,” Paul said this week of the people who have been targeted. “They summarily execute people without presenting evidence to the public… so it’s wrong.”

Keep reading

The New Monroe Doctrine: Cuban Aid, Brazilian Bloodbath, and an Update on Venezuela

If you’ve been sniffing around the MSM today (or social media), you’ve probably seen headlines implying we’re poised for military action inside Venezuela to take out Nicolás Maduro and his regime. That’s because outlets like the Miami Herald are reporting that “the Trump Administration has made the decision to attack military installations inside Venezuela and the strikes could come at any moment” and “will seek to destroy military installations used by the drug-trafficking organization the U.S. says is headed by Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro and run by top members of his regime.”

The Herald also reports that an anonymous source said, “Maduro is about to find himself trapped and might soon discover that he cannot flee the country even if he decided to. What’s worse for him, there is now more than one general willing to capture and hand him over, fully aware that one thing is to talk about death, and another to see it coming.” 

Some call it “advanced planning,” while others report that this action could take place within days or even hours. Some still seem to think that this means a full-on invasion. Even old Bernie Sanders is on X fussing about Trump “declaring war.”  

Let’s calm down and take a deep breath here. First of all, as I’m literally typing this, Donald Trump is on Air Force Once talking to reporters, and he denied that he’s made a decision about any type of military action on Venezuelan soil. The White House has also told us that when/if it happens, they will let us know. It won’t be some reporter with a “source close to the situation.” 

Keep reading

Rand Paul: It’s Odd We’re Not Charging Survivors from Boat Strikes for Drug Crimes

On Wednesday’s broadcast of Newsmax TV’s “Rob Schmitt Tonight,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) stated that when there are survivors of the strikes on what the Trump administration alleges are drug boats, “we don’t try them for drug crimes or we don’t even keep them. We’ve been sending them back.” And “We have no evidence of who they are, other than an accusation that they are drug dealers.”

Paul said, “It’s interesting that, as the boats have been exploded, and as we’ve used this deadly force, when there are survivors, we don’t try them for drug crimes or we don’t even keep them. We’ve been sending them back. So, we repatriated, last week, somebody to Colombia and somebody to Ecuador. So, you would think that, when there are survivors, that they would be tried for a drug crime.”

He continued, “You would think we would be hearing evidence that they’re collecting drugs that are floating around in the water afterwards. You would think we’d hear evidence that the people were armed. So, we don’t know their names. We have no evidence of who they are, other than an accusation that they are drug dealers. But we also, in our country, haven’t typically just killed people because we accuse them of being a drug dealer.”

Keep reading